Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 16 items for

  • Author: Mary A. Hums x
Clear All Modify Search
Restricted access

Mary A. Hums

Restricted access

Mary A. Hums

Although the sport industry continues to evolve, one thing has not changed—the need for sport managers to be good citizens. What does it mean to be a good citizen and how does that relate to us as sport management educators and researchers? This lecture suggests what we as sport management educators can do to help our students become better citizens in this day and age. As new issues emerge, our graduates will be forced to make decisions which often place the Temple and the Agora—the spirit of sport and the business of sport, the conscience and commerce of sport management— in opposition to each other. These new issues encompass topics such as social entrepreneurship, technology, environmental respect, sport for development and peace, and sport and human rights, and need to be woven into the fabric of our sport management curriculum.

Restricted access

Mary A. Hums and Packianathan Chelladurai

This study examined the development of an instrument to assess the views held by NCAA male and female coaches and administrators concerning the principles of distributive justice used in the allocation of resources in athletic departments. The steps in the development of the instrument, including the use of a panel of experts, a pilot study, and a confirmatory study, are presented. Scenarios were developed describing situations involving either distribution or retribution of three different resources within athletic departments; money, facilities, or support services. The eight allocation principles listed under each scenario were (a) equality of treatment, (b) equality of results, and (c) equality of opportunity; contributions based on (d) productivity, (e) spectator appeal, (f) effort, and (g) ability; and (h) need. Subjects were asked to rate the justness of each allocation principle in each scenario and to choose which allocation principle they would implement in that scenario.

Restricted access

Mary A. Hums and Packianathan Chelladurai

This study examined the principles of distributive justice held by male and female coaches and athletic administrators from all three NCAA divisions in allocating resources within athletic departments. A total of 328 subjects from Divisions I, II, and III responded to the instrument, which contained 12 scenarios describing situations of either distribution or retribution of three different resources-—money, facilities, or support services. The eight allocation principles listed under each scenario were (a) equality of treatment, (b) equality of results, and (c) equality of opportunity; contributions based on (d) productivity, (e) spectator appeal, (f) effort, and (g) ability; and (h) need. In each distributive situation, subjects were asked to rate the justness of each allocation principle and to choose one of the eight principles for implementation. All subgroups rated equality of treatment, need, and equality of results as the most just and the other principles as relatively unjust. These principles were also the principles most frequently chosen by subjects for implementation.

Restricted access

Glenna G. Bower and Mary A. Hums

The purpose of this study was to explore the reasons for mentoring women to advance within leadership positions as international physical educators. The study focused on the following within international physical education departments: (a) individual reasons for mentoring women, (b) organizational factors that inhibit or facilitate the ability to mentor women, (c) protégé characteristics that attract mentors to women protégés, and (d) outcomes associated with mentoring women. A phenomenological research design was chosen to examine the mentoring relationship. A group of women from a wide variety of colleges and universities were con at the International Association of Physical Education and Sport for Girls and Women (IAPESGW) conference (N = 5). The primary means of collecting data were in-depth interviews. A constant comparative analysis was used throughout the study. The study provided valuable information for mentors wanting to find ways to successfully mentor women to advance within leadership positions as interna academic physical educators.

Restricted access

Daniel F. Mahony, Mary A. Hums and Harold A. Riemer

The distribution of resources in intercollegiate athletics has been controversial for many years. Prior research indicated various stakeholders believed need-based distributions were fair and were more likely to be used. It was not clear, however, how the stakeholders determined need or which sports had the greatest needs. The results of the current study indicate that athletic administrators believe programs need more resources when they lack resources, have high program costs, or lack adequate resources to be competitively successful. Although these three reasons were each identified by all groups, Division I administrators cited competitive success more often, and Division III administrators cited high program costs more often. The current study also found that football was the sport believed to have the greatest needs at both the NCAA Division I and Division III levels, and men’s sports were generally believed to have greater needs.

Restricted access

Daniel F. Mahony, Mary A. Hums and Harold A. Riemer

Hums and Chelladurai (1994b) found NCAA coaches and administrators believed distributing resources based on equality and need was more just than distributing them based on equity (i.e., contribution). However, Mahony and Pastore (1998) found actual distributions, particularly at the NCAA Division I level, appear to be based on equity over equality and need. The main purpose of the current study was to determine why the findings in these studies differed. The authors of the current study reexamined the principles from Hums and Chelladurai's (1994b) study, while making significant changes in the sample examined, asking new questions, and adding more distribution options. The results indicated that need based principles were considered to be the most fair, but there was less support for equality than in prior research. In addition, the current study found differences between Division I and Division III administrators with regards to some equality and equity based principles.

Restricted access

Daniel F. Mahony, Michael Mondello, Mary A. Hums and Michael Judd

The growth of sport management has led to concerns about the quantity and quality of candidates for faculty positions. In addition to trying to recruit recent doctoral graduates, many programs focus on recruiting established faculty members. This study examines factors affecting the willingness of sport management faculty to accept new positions, and the likelihood of leaving their current positions. While the likelihood of leaving was not high, objective factors such as salary and location were important to those willing to take a new position. Subjective factors such as fit within the program and quality of faculty in the program were also important, whereas several factors were less important (e.g., recruiter description, recruiter approach, and leadership opportunities). Results confirm that attracting faculty in sport management is challenging and universities must consider a combination of strategies to attract them.

Restricted access

Daniel F. Mahony, Harold A. Riemer, James L. Breeding and Mary A. Hums

Prior research has found that coaches and administrators at NCAA institutions believed distributing resources equally or based on program needs was fairer than distributing them based on program contributions. The current studies build on these findings by examining the views of fairness among college athletes and other college students in a hypothetical intercollegiate athletics setting (N = 150) and a hypothetical sport business setting (N = 150). In both settings, equality of treatment and need are most likely to be chosen as the fairest allocation methods. Although there are no group differences in the sport business setting, chi-square analysis and analysis of fairness ratings indicate some group differences in the intercollegiate athletics setting. Women are stronger supporters of equal distributions and equal reductions, whereas men are more supportive of making decisions based on need and contribution of the program.

Restricted access

Marion E. Hambrick, Mary A. Hums, Glenna G. Bower and Eli A. Wolff

Elite athletes require the most advanced sports equipment to maintain their competitive edge, but manufacturers cannot always satisfy these athletes’ specific equipment needs. Sport involvement can influence sports-equipment selections and is described as the process by which individuals rely on attitudes and belief systems to make sports-related consumption decisions. This study involved semistructured interviews with 5 elite Parasport athletes to identify and analyze the role of sport involvement in their selection of sports equipment. The results revealed that the athletes identified product limitations, created a collaborative environment, and promoted a culture of innovation to develop new sports products and address existing limitations. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.