In his 2024 Earle F. Zeigler address, Mason explores the interplay between theory development and the state of the field in sport management by drawing parallels to Winston’s (1998) work on the diffusion of technology. In doing so, he suggests scholars broaden their horizons when it comes to entertaining concepts from other fields and be more receptive to novel ideas in sport management scholarship. The articles within this issue embody the ideas that Mason (2025) put forth in his address and highlight the role of theory within knowledge development in our field. The work spans topic areas and contexts to articulate the power of theory to shape design, method, and the conclusions drawn by authors.
Donavan et al. (2025) examine the 3M Model developed by Mowen (2000) to unpack a structured framework that accounts for the attitudinal outcomes, behavioral outcomes, and trait antecedents that influence sport enthusiasts’ social identity. The use of theory is further emphasized by applying Basking in Reflected Glory (BIRGing; Cialdini et al., 1976) to conceptualize a hierarchical model of sport fan behavior. In response to Mason’s (2025) call, the theories applied here may be explored in other sport contexts (e.g., the sport boardroom; sport events) where social identity is a phenomenon of interest.
With the proliferation in technology linking sports fans to nearly any athlete, sport, or league of their choosing, “satellite fans” make up an increasingly meaningful part of a sport team’s market. How culture shapes the remote connection between team and fan is understudied (Behrens et al., 2021) and is the subject of Su et al.’s (2025) research in this issue. The novel theoretical approach to utilize Consumer Culture Theory produced the four archetypal pathways to fanship in these satellite groups, richly adding a needed layer to our appreciation of fan attachment processes (Funk & James, 2006).
Baer et al. (2025) explore concepts within the sport boardroom and adopt positive organizational scholarship (POS) and human resource development (HRD) theory as frames in the study of meaningful work and well-being within sport workplace experiences. POS and HRD provide the foundation for semi-structured interviews with sport employees working in the sport industry in the United States. As emphasized by Mason (2025), future research within the field may unpack POS and HRD theory and investigate their applicability in other sporting contexts (e.g., among sport volunteers; within experiences of individuals from equity-denied groups working in sport in other countries).
Lifecycle theory is featured in Tiwari and Murthy’s (2025) article charting the IPL’s movement from niche sport to mass cool. Notably, the league underwent a regression in coolness along its journey. The authors add to the brand coolness lifecycle theory, proposing a nuanced understanding beyond a simple movement between dichotomous stages. Instead, it proposed that coolness is “dynamic and ever-changing” including stages of advancement and regression, acknowledging reversals in coolness. As a pioneering work in sport brand coolness, we underscore previous calls (Blank et al., 2014) to propose new theories and examine overlooked settings.
The articles featured in this issue represent a snapshot of the kinds of distinct perspectives that are driving the field of sport management. We can see that the field continues to draw from diverse theoretical viewpoints and builds a strong foundation that makes sport management a truly unique discipline. Following Mason (2025) and other Zeigler addresses (Chalip, 2006; Zhang, 2015), we look forward to seeing new and exciting ways to examine the management of sport in the coming years.
References
Baer, N.R., Zvosec, C.C., & Oja, B.D. (2025). Exploring sport employee conceptualizations of meaningful work. Journal of Sport Management, 39(1),
Behrens, A., Yang, Y., & Uhrich, S. (2021). Keeping it real or bridging the gap? Brand positioning of U.S. Sport teams in Germany and China. Journal of Sport Management, 36(2), 105–117.
Blank, A.S., Sweeney, K., & Fuller, R.D. (2014). Room for growth in professional sport: An examination of the factors affecting African-American attendance. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 23(4), 225–239.
Chalip, L. (2006). Toward a distinctive sport management discipline. Journal of Sport Management, 20(1), 1–21.
Cialdini, R.B., Borden, R.J., Thorne, A., Walker, M.R., Freeman, S., & Sloan, L.R. (1976). Basking in reflected glory: Three (football) field studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34(3), 366.
Donavan, D.T., Singer, M.F., & Carlson, B.D. (2025). Fan socializing and BIRGing: The impact of trait competitiveness on fan behaviors. Journal of Sport Management, 39(1), 1–12.
Funk, D.C., & James, J.D. (2006). Consumer loyalty: The meaning of attachment in the development of sport team allegiance. Journal of Sport Management, 20(2), 189–217.
Mason, D. (2025). The bare supervening necessities of theory development in sport management. Journal of Sport Management, 39(1).
Mowen, J.C. (2000). The 3M model of motivation and personality: Theory and empirical applications to consumer behavior. Springer Science & Business Media.
Su, Y., Zhou, X., Funk, D., & Daniels, J. (2025). Cross-cultural comparison of satellite fanship: A consumer culture theory perspective. Journal of Sport Management, 39(1), 1–13.
Tiwari, A.A., & Murthy, V. (2025). Symbolic interactionism and the metamorphosis of sports brands: Indian Premier League’s journey from niche to mass cool. Journal of Sport Management, 39(1), 1–16.
Winston, B.N. (1998). Media technology and society. Routledge.
Zhang, J.J. (2015). What to study? That is a question: A conscious thought analysis. Journal of Sport Management, 29(1), 1–10.
