Delivery in day(s): 4
HESS559 Research Methods in Sports Management Assignment
Sporting comes with a lot of benefits since it brings different communities together to celebrate and share different cultural aspects. When people are busy watching or attending such events, they will no longer involve in bad activities like stealing, taking drugs or even fighting against themselves. Sporting brings countries together for instance, Australia has been a host of 3 commonwealth games and it’s the only country to have completed in all Olympic Games. It has been represented in all 13 commonwealth games in higher level since they began (Webb, Rowland & Fasano, 2010). This as well shows that the country has big commitment to sports. Australia is a world champion in different sports and has won most of the medals and ranked the leading country in sports in Atlanta. They are recognized for being the best in Olympic Games as most of the Australians are believed to have broken world championships. For this reason, Australia has laid down strategies to improve sports in future. It has 4 pyramids and in this paper will discuss them and how they represent management, organization and structure (Weimer, 2013). There are also emerging factors and new business models of sports, sports structure and organization in Australia and internationally that will be discussed in this paper. Also will include the utility pyramids models and how it represent sports in Australia.
The Four Pyramids
There are four pyramids of sports in Australia are as follows
1. Foundation- this is the base or simply the foundation of the continuum, and includes the vibrant first phases of learning elementary movement abilities.
2. Participation- this is one higher up from the foundation, and includes physical exercise of one’s leisureliness choice, participating in an activity for fitness, health, supports and entertainment.
3. Performance is higher up than participation, and comprises the task of increasing skills by struggling to increase individual principles of involvement (Wells, 2015).
4. Excellence is attainment of the highest point of the continuum and comprises achieving countrywide and publicly known principles of performance (Westerbeek, 2009).
Model I: Structure Of The Pyramid
This is a Model of Pyramid-Based Sport researched by Farmer and Arnaudon (2016). In its place of four, they presented the model with three stages that are high performance, intermediate level and sport mass participation. They claimed that this model is definitive all through the globe. Nevertheless, there is indication to propose otherwise. Someone disputed that sport growth has customarily been associated with the Participation Pyramid Model that combines six stages: these six stages include State or Territory, School sport, Local club sport, National, casual, International, from the bottom to the top of the pyramid, recreational and social participation and Regional.
Most meaningfully, the Customary Sport Growth Pyramid Model, the Participation Pyramid Model and the Model of Pyramid-Based Sport all take the shape of a pyramid. Shilbury and Deane (2011) argued that the sports pyramid form accepts that individuals rationally develop to the next stage of sport involvement without any association between entertaining competitions and semi-elite or exclusive competitions (Westerbeek, Shilbury & Deane, 2015). Therefore, the sporting pyramid has turn out to be stagnant and does not exactly signify the vibrant nature of movements that may occur in sports involvement. A model to demonstrate the above movement caused a disparity of the sport growth and demonstrated the dissimilar guidelines contestants that would take inside the pyramid.
Prevision, organization, coordination, training and control-assessment establish the content of the distinctive organization procedure, which could be reorganized by 3 stages or key phases: the prevision stage (planned thinking, prediction explanation, action development and exercitation of the other purposes of organization in a potential visualization); the functioning stage (described by the majority of the organization, organization and training the workers for the existing attainment of the objectives (Wilson & Hutchinson, 2016)..
When considering a lasting policy for increasing performance at a unit level, club’s or countrywide level, there is need to know the standard of sporting involvement pyramid where the base offers a great choice base for performance , participation and then, superiority. The stages of performance and their superiority in the subsystem rely on both the quantifiable features of the collection base, but similarly on the qualitative administrative functions and capabilities of the administrations. So as to attain superiority it is a necessity to offer the overall support of “ascending” the performance pyramid. Obviously, not all the kids that are enthusiastic to participate in sporting events are skillful to attain superiority, but we need have an sufficient kids and youths performing physical exercise and sporting from which we could choose those with abilities, in whom we could advance more (Wilson, 2016).
It is similarly important that Australia’s medal targets are genuine. In modern times, there has been a vivid intensification in the measure of elite sports investment, mostly by nations with meaningfully higher residents and finances. In reaction to this, there are supporters for much better finance for Olympic elite sporting. The appropriate National Sporting Organizations and Australian Olympic Committee and the Australian Paralympic Committee (APC) have put together a situation for an extra $110 million annually on average on the foundation that this is necessary to withstand Australia’s ranking as a ‘Top Five’ medal total (Woodman, 2008).
The board is not in a position to dispute whether this could be cash worth earnings since it cannot judge it in light of other urgencies. Nevertheless we doubt that this is where the next $110 million annually for sporting ought to be spent. A collective opinion articulated to the board even by various National Sporting Organizations was that elite performance eventually rely on the complexity of participation and this part has been seriously underfunded (Xiangjun & Brownell, 2016).
Additionally, ‘medal count’ is a hesitant measure. The board strongly have faith in the community desires to be cultured to think in a different way about what institutes Olympic achievement. There are presently round 200 occasions at the Olympics and medal count prejudices subsidy towards specific occasions rather than team sporting that the board have faith in should have some urgency given their significance to our civilization. For instance, there are two gold medals existing in every team participating in sports like basketball and hockey but there are 48 in sports events and even somersaulting has 8, while canoe has 15 (Yin, 2009).
Ultimately, we must to deliberate what we could manage to pay for to capitalize and how we suitably stabilize this investment to backing a wider description of sports victory. This may mean additional explicitly significant elite sports victory in the setting of prioritizing those sporting that seizure the nation’s imagination and symbolize its essence and beliefs. These are the sporting where our achievement on the nationwide and global platform is significant to our sense of victory as a country.
There ought to be discussion on which sporting carry the countrywide philosophy. Hockey, football codes,swimming, surf lifesaving, cricket, cycling, the, netball, golf, basketball, tennis and surfing are amongst the most common sporting in Australia, a part of the nationwide essence. Several of the team are the sporting we are familiarized to as part of our initial education and communal participation.
If more cash is to be injected into the organization then we need to give thoughtful deliberation to where that cash is paid. If we are really concerned in a preventive fitness program through sporting then much of it might be well spent on lifetime contestants than nearly all on a minor group of elite sportspersons who may perform at that level for just a a small number of ages collaboration with other businesses or firms might provide chances for improving sporting in Austrilia (Yin, 2014). In an instance of this, the Australian Institutes of Sporthas been working together with the Commonwealth Scientific on sport science programs in modern years, with inspiring outcomes. Corporations with ‘Information Technology’ firms might recognize creativities appropriate to sporting. There are probable to be numerous other instances.
Sports organizations, at all stages, administrations and populations must make more exertion to recognize and take advantage of prospects across regions. The existing organization works against such comprehensive engagement (Ying & Roberts, 2015).. With National Sporting Organizations dependent on both nationwide and national/land government resources for their programs, they are enforced to use state and national/land government organizations whether this is best or not. National Sporting Organizations are incompetent to benefit from chances outside this organization. The new subsidy model may help in setting this problem. The Austrilian Sport Commison ought to offer guidance to government on the serious choices concerning investment urgencies. Motivated yet attainable objectives ought to be set for elite sporting permitting choices on investment for involvement in sporting through to elite sport to be made positively (Zilberman, 2016).
Indicatively, the board commends some overall strictures for these objectives. We ought to seek to and be satisfied of, say, ‘Top five’ results for certain chosen sporting at the Olympics and have greater ambitions in others. Separate objectives could be established for Paralympic, Commonwealth Games and World Championship occasions. We ought to seek for Australia to at least sustain existing global positions in those sporting substantial to Australians. Where a sport has no elite global antagonism, upholding a possible and thrilling nationwide elite competition ought to be the aim. In the future, the National Sport Organization ought to improve its strategy covering high performance platforms and public involvement with management from the Australia Sport Commission. It could then relate to the the Australia Sport Commission for subsidy (Gioacchino, Ginebri & Sabani, 2014). The the Australia Sport Commission could then assign money. The National Sport Organization would then purchase facilities from several suppliers to bring elite programs, the National Sport Organization selecting from existing suppliers for example the Australia Institutes of Sport but similarly colleges, private workers, and foreign foundations.
Supporting these ambitions and objectives need to have a plan to develop all sport’s involvement base, increase the pools of ability in our chosen involvement sporting and suitably participate in elite paths and athlete support. Quantifiable objectives ought to be approved with the countries and lands and National Sports Ogranizations for communal involvement and community involment.
For better achievement we need also look at healthier training paths and the exercise and progress of executives and managers and we ought to support our massive volunteering communal across the sporting area. Our paper focused on the Central Government’s participation with sporting. The Austrilian Sport Commison has no effect on physical exercise in institutes and the physical exercise and ability growth mechanisms of involvement. The establishment for physical exercise in institutes falls in the accountabilities of national sections of training. Thus, the syllabus for physical exercise and ability attainment in institutes is a national government concern. This proposes that the retaining/alteration procedure does not specify the place and part it takes in physical exercise in the growth of movement abilities for future sport involvement chances. Therefore, a corresponding training on the retaining/alteration procedure, which addresses the concern of physical exercise in institutes could be an essential addition to the procedure (Donnelly, 2011).
This paper symbolizes a theoretic and applied solution for consolidating the sporting action at a sporting club and constituent part level. Establishing its methodology on the performance pyramid, targeting to attain a competent organization, this might contribute to the sporting structure improvement in all its customs, correspondingly: human resources and bearing in mind all the current appliances (of enticing and usage of assets considering the means that are accessible and required?)
This subject comprises a complete methodology capable to reorganize the “sporting pyramid” on purposeful ideologies, related to the appropriate meanings of this action for a country that is capable, but it is messy at this period, mostly due to a dysfunctional structure. The performance pyramid is an idea that could be incorporated in a planned organization broader perception considering the point that equating to the operative organization, planned organization is described by lengthier interval scales (Douglas, 2011).
Beginning with the principles of reorganizing the performance pyramid and of attesting its base by a long-lasting choice program, we have managed in only two years, correspondingly 2011, 2012. The core objective of the training anticipated is to intensify the sporting achievement to reach at a higher level. So as to recognize the core features, which led to the involution of sporting success in the sports events there is the need to be capable to intricate a new approach, that would involve a deep study by reviewing and evaluating the previous two Olympia phases in terms of outcomes told to age groups (Dubnick & Bardes, 2013).
This approach can be understood and realistic, bearing in mind the specificity and carefulness of the sports events, sport self-control, method that has convoluted a distinguished dynamics due to a variety of aspects:
• The locality (the environmental issue);
• Custom (the earlier historical models);
• Circumstances (setting, organization);
• Professionals, workforce;
• Reputation of sportsmen and women and the intensities of responsiveness in which it concerns sports competitions;
• The prospect of increasing the awareness to the population about sports.
Model 2: The Sport Development Pyramid
The prevailing engagement of opinions identified in relation to the sporting development suggests the acknowledgment of dual contrasting approaches, trickle- down (top-down), and (trickle-up) (bottom-up) developments. These dual theories reveal different sporting strategy methodologies. Jobling (2011), claimed that the battle of concepts is legitimised ever since diverse regimes might have grounded their strategies in very diverse considerations/assumptions that might create understated yet telling dissimilarities in strategy execution.
Collectively, the prevailing sporting development structures only describe publics’ flexibility from one stage to another and not the trickle effects supposedly motivating sporting strategies, packages, and their exceptions of aftermaths. In addition, no structure happens to openly exemplify and explain the trickle-up and down-effects. Furthermore, there is no model or concept unfolding the relationship between sporting strategy and sporting growth developments. Therefore, the prevailing models are insufficient to demonstrate how sporting strategy impacts and shapes sporting growth procedures. These concerns led to the denunciation of the prevailing sport ing development continuum as a sustainable theoretic structure to describe relationships between sporting development procedures and regime sporting strategy. This denunciation left no prevailing theoretic structure to support the study that in turn recommended the necessity for a grounded concept methodology (Dye, 2016).
Basically, this model purposes to survey in what way the Central Government’s sporting strategy affects sporting growth practices at a nationwide stage so as to comprehend the part sporting strategies play in offering the necessary passageways for sporting growth in Australia. This is attained by empirically constructing a model of sporting growth applicable to the Australian sporting organization. This model disputes that the existing sporting growth pyramids do not speak on the query of the technique the trickle-down and trickle-up developments function in Australia. More specially, this model show that sporting growth does not function in an emptiness and that the sporting strategy players have an important part in the development (Dye, 2017).
This model similarly argues that there are sporting growth shareholders, practices and paths that are important for fruitful growth practices. These must to be empirically considered and recognized. Basically, this study is the first strength to offer a way of recognizing the diverse roles and accountabilities for those intricated in sporting growth, from the lowermost to the upper stages of success. The investigation areas of analysis are summarized below:
(a) What is the key part played by the sporting growth players in sport improvement?
(b) By what means do sporting strategies affect or nature sporting growth practices?
(c) What are the accessible sporting growth paths and in what way do they occur?
(d) What are the relations between sporting strategy players, strategies and sporting growth practices?
Although some of this work was available in the 1980s, it however only replicates the sporting strategy growth until the late 1980s. Consequently, these studies do not observe the existing effect of sporting strategy in Australia. This model seal an emptiness in the writings of Australian studies on sporting strategy. In addition, it achieve the above in an logical method, to provide the first experimental sporting strategy enquiry in Australia in relation to sporting growth (Eady, 2013).
Most significantly, the theoretic implication of this model rely on its influence towards constructing a model on sporting growth practices, in describing the battle between contrasting statement.
Agreeing to Eady (2014), the modern sporting growth pyramids do not provide an explanation or rationalisation of the strategy players convoluted. This model integrates sporting strategy players and their opinion of the sporting growth practice to show the association between strategic players and sporting growth practices.
The model offers a theoretic structure that integrates all the above-mentioned aspects (that is, shareholders, practices and paths) that control sporting growth practices in Australia. In addition, it intends to construct a model on sporting growth practices that will be accessible for additional investigation and testing of theories (Gratton, 2010). By utilizing inductive thinking, grounded model permits a functional model to develop that fits the condition being investigated, deals with the particular area of investigation and clarifies the procedures and relations under investigation. The outcomes of this investigation specify the effects of nationwide sporting strategy on organizations of the Australian sporting industry functioning at a national or native stage, therefore providing an inclusive description of the Australian sporting industry.
Chalip, (2015) argued that the strategic analyst try to find the assumptions of strategy creators. Weimer, (2013) summarised Chalip, work by upholding that the goal is not simply to define the rationality of strategy discussions but somewhat to classify opinions of poor reasoning, to expedite condemnation of the heavy norms, and to find important deliberations, which have been excepted from strategy discussions. Investigation of this type could help the customary objectives of strategy investigation to improve the superiority of business strategy policy. Nevertheless, these identical studies offer the necessary apparatuses for categorizing research requirements and expressing disagreement policies to be practical to lobbying energies and community view movements. In this logic strategy, investigation is a crucial instrument for sporting organization.
This model explores the undercurrents of sporting growth strategy in Australia, and offers a radical understanding of government contribution with sporting and sporting strategies for sporting executives. It similarly offers a structure to help understanding of effective sporting growth from elite to mass involvement and vice versa. In addition, this model provides a theoretic structure with substantial prospective to upcoming researchers for additional investigation (Eaves, 2011). Extra investigation would test the theory using a measurable experimental study and spread the confines of familiarity on sporting growth in Australia and worldwide.
As explained earlier, administrations and sports organizations can function at a native, national or worldwide level. The Sporting task force formed in 1999, reports established that at the Australian countrywide level, the sports organizational has continued the same way since Westerbeek (2015) study.
Sporting in Australia are organized and harmonized by National Sporting Organizations. Bramham (2011) define National Sporting Organizations as the nationwide representatives of their sporting. The Bramham (2011) claimed that these organizations achieve the involvement and growth of their sporting in Australia. However, Farmer and Arnaudon (2017) noted that National Sporting Organizations are involved in establishing and shepherding nationwide championships, interacting with the worldwide parent body, advertising and supporting nationwide occasions, fund-raising for nationwide teams, choosing and developing skills, choosing nationwide teams for global occasions, and interacting with the Central Government.
For a National Sporting Organizations to be acknowledged by the Australian Sports Commission, its programs and facilities need to satisfy all the constituents of the Australian Sports Commission description of sporting that is a human doings capable of attaining an outcome needing physical effort and/or physical ability that, by its organization and nature, is competitive and is largely recognized as being a sport (Edwards, 2010).
According to the Australian Sports Commission yearly report of more than 200 National Sporting Organizations operating in Australia, around 110 were documented, therefore sponsored by the Australian Sports Commission. Despite funding, extra main action of the Australian Sports Commission is the assessment of National Sporting Organizations. According to Bramham (2001) report, there are a number of National Sporting Organizations, which are well organized and usefully concentrated with improvement strategies, which address all features of their sporting from elite to mass involvement. Much of this has caused from strategies and programs of the Australian Sports Commission, such as the Active Australia programs, which provide for elite and mass involvement improvement requirements correspondingly. As Arnaudon and Farmer (2017) argued, the real governmental organization of the Australian Sports Commission and its programs is intended to enable the enactment of these strategies objectives in collaboration with nationwide sports administrations.
The future of sports
I believe that sports overall will become more popular in our future. Commercialized sports just continue to make lots of money; therefore I wouldn’t imagine those types of sports fading. I would also think that because many of them are so profitable we could expect other sports organizations to make an attempt to increase their profits from commercializing other sports. Many power and performance sports are fueled with excitement and competition and their just too entertaining to shy away from in the future. Our technology relating to sports is improving frequently in many ways. Technology is improving sports equipment for athlete’s safety helping to increase excitement within sports too. Athletes are faster, stronger, and their able to push themselves harder than ever with the help of today’s technology in regards to faster recovery techniques (Eisenhardt, 2009).
In my opinion, I would say that pleasure and performance sports will gain more participation from individuals at a casual or recreational level. This is mainly due to our society trying to encourage more fitness and health for the public. Fitness and health issues are all over the news and internet; people are always coming up with different ways to improve the quality of our health and bodies. I think more people will want to improve their health and bodies by having fun being active in a sports, rather than boring exercises.
As I said earlier, commercialized power and performance sports will be more popular than they are today. I do think that the parents of the future will eventually try to steer their children away from power and performance sports at young ages (Goward, 2009).
Australians citizens like sporting. It has continuously been and will remain to be part of their national identity.
Evolution of Management
The Australian Sports Commission (ASC) has joined with the Commonwealth Technical organization, Australia’s top science organization, and Industrial Investigation Organisation to mutually conduct a study into the future of Australian sporting (Elias, Cavana & Jackson, 2012).
The sporting played in Australia, along with how and why it s played, are varying over period. The study results as of The Future of Australian Sportingreport will show an significant part in determining lasting strategy, investment and planned development inside the government, the sporting segment and wider community. The Report highlights 6 sporting trends, which could describe the sporting segment in the next 20 years.
The Australian Administration and the ASC have long acknowledged the significance of high performance and communal sporting involvement. More lately, the significance of sporting’s involvement to the nationwide fitness program and societal enclosure has been highlighted. Nevertheless, with no obviously distinct motivations, no quantifiable objectives and no collection of backing information, execution has been low.
The nonexistence of a description of sports achievement has led to a letdown to gather important information about the superiority of Australia’s sporting and leisure involvement. This has reserved an evidence-based method to the growth of sporting strategies and approaches.
At the start of this evaluation, the board asked some simple queries about the volume of cash being paid by all Australian administrations on sporting, leisure and physical exercise, and its effect. It was astonishing to determine there is no present dependable material accessible to respond those threshold queries (Farmer & Arnaudon, 2016).
The only information established was derived from 2002–2003 Australian Agency of Information material. It established that roughly $3 billion was paid on sporting at that time across the three rows of regime. Only 15% came from the Australian Administration, 30% from national and land administrations, and the rest 55% from local administration. National, land and local administration expenditure was mainly focused to amenities and their maintenance.
Evolution of Organization And Delivery
Olympic medal amounts appear to be the one area where achievement is being well-defined and measured. No corresponding drive has been articulated for communal sports involvement where results are not even measured. Along with proposals acknowledged by the board, attendees at every community settings round the nation approved nationwide achievement ought to not be exclusively evaluated in terms of medal scores. When determining our nationwide sports declaration of achievement, elite achievement in non-Olympic sporting and the overall healthiness and suitability of Australians must likewise be deliberated. High communal involvement rates at every age and aptitudes; sturdy nationwide and club centered competitions; funding for instructors and acknowledgment of the role of unpaid workers are other aspects, which ought to be taken into account (Fielding & Lee, 2008).
The board recommends an extensive description of Australia’s sports achievement. In describing ‘achievement’ for the Australian sporting organization, the Australian Administration ought to pursue the recommendation and response of the Australian Sports Commission and involve in a discussion with the countries and lands and the sections accountable for sporting along with the Australian public about what way would be set for nationwide prominence and objectives.
Emerging Models of Sport Creation and Delivery and Sport Clusters
The board is of the opinion that, in recommending on the countrywide sporting strategy and models, the Australian Sports Commission pays strong respect to the following overall models:
1. reliable performances on the global sports phase, mostly in sporting well-liked by Australians
2. high sport and leisure involvement rates across the public
3. lively clubs and local and state antagonisms
4. the superiority of the fitness and health of the stateegotism in customs of fairness
5. the capacity of sporting to give to comprehensive and pleasant results in the public
6. continuing assurance to the battle against drug abus in sports
Elite sports achievement is an significant matter and needs an ongoing emphasis. But a stability requires to be struck between the amount of cash financed by all stages of the regime and the realization of aftermaths, mainly in the background of Commonwealth Games and Olympic performance (Flick, 2008).
The Australian Administration subsidy for sporting that is dispersed over the Australian Sports Commission goes devastatingly to Olympic sporting. In 2008–2009, for instance, the Australian Sports Commission dispersed approximately $80 million in donations to nationwide sports organizations. Roughly 70% of this went to Olympic sporting and over 80% of this amount went to top performance programs. The board supports the setting of determined objectives for Australia’s elite sports achievement. Nevertheless, a re-valuation of subsidy main concern in light of strategy purposes is now suitable (Girginou, 2011). First, the subsidy disparity between Olympic and non-Olympic sporting ought to be interrogated. More weight ought to be set to sporting, which are common with several Australians. There are 20 Australian crews that grasp top three global standings and more than half of them are in non-Olympic sporting (Gittins, 2009).
The unfairness towards subsiding Olympic sporting leads to consequences, which make slight tactical logic for Australia. For instance, less administration resources are provided for cricket than for archery that has more than 200 times the number of contestants according to unpublished Australian Sports Commission information. Polo obtains as much high performance and Australian Organization of Sporting subsidy as tennis, lawn tennis, golf joined even though these sporting could truly claim to be full of time sporting and noteworthy providers to the Australian Administrations preventive fitness program (Glaser, 2016).
In additional, the significant of spending must be more thoroughly evaluated. The board was directed that computing the ‘prices of medals’ is hard and any assumption could be difficult. The board comprehend this but certain exertion requires to be complete since without this info, investment results cannot be made on a sensible on this basis (Glaser, 2012).
What we do distinguish is that the continual level of subsidy needed over five years to earn Olympic and Commonwealth games medals. Australia’s medal standing in Beijing was 6th a very admirable outcome and the third greatest performance in 20 years. This was occasioned in 15 gold medals and 48 medals aggregate and either manner the calculation is complete, the outcome is very costly (Glaser & Strauss, 2017). The Australian Sports Commission subsidy to Olympic sporting for their elite programs runs at over $70 million annually and this does not comprise national and land subsidy or Australian Olympic Committee (AOC) donations. Over 4 year phases, it is easy to develop facts in the order of $10 million per gold medal or $5 million per medal. Higher numbers are regularly raised up in the state media (Goulding, 2012).
The apparent reaction is that we undervalue the numerous intangible paybacks. But similar is factual of many other sporting. Australians are very concerned in what transpires in golf, surfing, cricket, not to name the several football codes. On what foundation are these sporting not equivalent applicants on the community prize?
Significantly, the board could find no indication that high profile sports occasions like the Olympics have a substantial impact on sporting participation. So if sporting are to be sponsored in part to inspire wide participation, some urgency ought to be given to those sporting played all through the nation and even more so to those that involve their participants through their generations.
1. Warhurst, J. 2017. The Labor Party. In D. P. Woodward, A. & Summers, Government, politics, power & policy in Australia,Sth. Melbourne: Longman. vol. 2, pp. 167-187.
2. Watt, D. C. 2008. Sports management and administration. London: Routledge.
3. Webb, P., Rowland, G., & Fasano C. 2010. Development of sport policy and programs in sporting organisations: Theoretical and practical considerations. The ACHPER National Journal, vol. 129, p.5-8.
4. Weimer, D. L. 2013. The current state of design craft: Borrowing, tinkering, and problem solving. Public Administration Review, vol. 53(2), p. 110-120.
5. Wells, K. 2015. The strategy of grounded theory: Possibilities and problems. Social Work Research, vol. 19(1), p. 33.
6. Westerbeek, H. 2009. The influence of frequency of attendance and age on 'place' - Specific dimensions of service quality at Australian Rules Football Matches. Sport Marketing Quarterly, vol. 9(4), p. 194-202.
7. Westerbeek, H., Shilbury, D., & Deane, J. 2015. The Australian sport system, its history and an organisational overview. European Journal for Sport Management, vol. 2(1), p. 42-58.
8. Wilson, H., & Hutchinson, S. 2016. Methodologic mistakes in grounded theory.
9. Nursing Research, vol. 45(2), p. 122-124.
10. Wilson, J. 2016. Politics and leisure. London: Allen & Unwin.
11. impenny, P., & Gass, J. 2009. Interviewing in phenomenology and grounded theory: is there a difference? Journal of Advanced Nursing, vol. 31(6), p. 1485-1492.
12. Woodman, L. 2008. Sport development: Systems, trends and issues. Sports Coach, vol. 11(4), p. 29-38.
13. Xiangjun, C., & Brownell, S.E. 2016. The People's Republic of China. In L. Chalip, Johnson, A., & Stachura, National sports policies: An international handbookvol. 28, pp. 67-88.
14. Yin, R. K. 2009. Case study research: Design and methods. Beverly Hills, Calif: Sage.
15. Yin, R. K. 2014. Case study: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage.
16. Ying, T., & Roberts, K. 2015. Sport policy in the People's Republic of China. In S. Fleming, Talbot, M., & Tomlison, A. Policy and politics in sport, physical education and leisureEastbourne: Leisure Studies Association. Vol. 34, pp. 109-125.
17. Zilberman, V. 2016. East European Countries’ transition to Western model of sport organization: Major trends reflecting changes. ICHPER-SD, vol.3, p. 32
18. Di Gioacchino, D., Ginebri, S. & Sabani, L. (2014). The role of organized interest groups in policy making.New York: PalgraveMacmillan.
19. Donnelly, P. 2011. Sport and the state in socialist countries. In F. Landry, Landry, M., & Yerles, M. (Ed.), Sport: The Third MillenniumQuebec, Canada: Les Presses De l'Universite Laval. Vol. 4, pp. 303-310.
20. Douglas, S. A. 2011. Policy issues in sport and athletics. Policy Journal Studies, vol. 7(1), p. 137-151.
21. Dubnick, M. J., & Bardes, B. A. 2013. Thinking about public policy: A problem- solving approach. New York:Wiley.
22. Dye, T. R. 2016. Policy analysis: What governments do, why they do it, and what difference it makes: University of Alabama Press.
23. Dye, T. R. 2017. Understanding public policy(6thed.). Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
24. Eady, J. 2013. Practical sports development. London: Pitman.
25. Eaves, Y. D. 2011. A synthesis technique for grounded theory data analysis.
26. Methodological Issues in Nursing Research, vol. 35(5), p. 654-663.
27. Edwards, M. 2010. Social policy, public relation policy: From problems to practice. St Leonards: NSW: Allen & Unwin.
28. Eisenhardt, K. M. 2009. Building theories from case studies. Academy of Management Review, vol. 14(4), p. 532-551.
29. Elias, A. A., Cavana, R.Y., & Jackson, L.S. 2012. Stakeholder analysis for the R&D project management. R&D Management, vol. 32(4), p. 301-310.
30. Farmer, P., & Arnaudon, S. 2016. Australian sport policy. In L. Chalip, Johnson, A., & Stachura, L. (Ed.), National sport policies: An international handbook(pp. 1- 22). Westport: GreenwoodPress.