The Critical Construct of Management in Athletic Program Success — Part 1 of 5

Doc4blue has awoken from a 3 month sabbatical and has written a detailed essay on a topic of interest to the Michigan football fan; program management. Please feel free to ask for further information or clarification.

The Critical Construct of Management in Athletic Program Success — Part 1

There is almost certainly a reason why for over a century professional baseball has used the term “Manager” when referring to the person designated to run the on-field operations of a team. Other sports have chosen the moniker of “ Head Coach” to describe the leader of the pack. But no one can or will argue that a head coach, especially one who is adjudged by a large segment of society as being successful, is not a skilled manager. The argument may be in the level of managerial skill of each individual discussed.

The overlying purpose of this academic discourse is to offer insights into the underlying background and structural elements of successful management relating to athletic programs.

There are few secrets in sports. Sports as a singular entity is a copycat field of endeavor. Still, some early coaching pioneers demonstrated a much higher level of success, winning and otherwise, than their contemporaries. These pioneers are now called legends. And so, the “secrets” of winning became better known to others through assistants moving on, books, coaching clinics, and a substantial psychological knowledge base being developed throughout the entire 20th Century. This knowledge base defined and studied underlying traits that can lead to the successful management of teams. So, one can say the coaches beat the psychologists to the basic premises. The desired result of all of these collective identified psychological traits is success. And in sports, success is most often linked to winning. There will be no discussion here as to the merit of using winning as a primary indicator of athletic success.

Let us proceed by first accepting the underlying assumption that program management is essential for team success in high level sports programs. First colleges, then high schools, and then youth groups concluded that there must be a managerial organizational structure put in place. Even the Saturday morning 45 minute soccer practice for 10 year olds likely has an organized structure. Just as likely, the athletes and parents probably appreciate the embedded structure. And so administrative positions such as athletic directors and liaisons to the faculty were created and still exist to smoothly manage program elements.

But more than smoothness is needed for management to be considered successful, positive outcomes are a must. Some outcomes are obvious and some are not, being of the on the practice field and behind the closed-door nature. Some outcomes, either positive or negative, happen by chance or luck, but most outcomes do not. Some outcomes happen by a natural evolution of events that may cause change. For example, the spread offense is rapidly advancing in college football and may cause a change of events and outcomes down the road for pro football.

As stated, most positive outcomes are related not to chance, but instead to the planning and actions of purposeful administration. Resources and materials are indeed critical, that is necessary. But resources/materials alone are not sufficient for the highest level of success. Success brought about by resource advantages diminishes as administrative expertise or effort declines.

Thanks for stopping by http://gobluemichiganwolverine.blogspot.com/
If you have any questions please e-mail erocwolverine@gmail.com

Written by Doc4blue