Academic Review of the Role of Voluntary Sports
Clubs
Final Report
Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy,
Loughborough University
Dr Mike Weed
Dr Leigh Robinson
Dr Paul Downward
Dr Mick Green
Professor Ian Henry
Professor Barrie Houlihan
Elesa Argent
June 2005
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
page 2
1) Introduction
page 6
2) The Review Strategy
page 10
2.1)
The Systematic Review Procedure
page 10
2.2)
The Systematic Review of Voluntary
Sports Club Research
page 12
3) Thematic Analysis
page 17
3.1)
The Voluntary Context
page 19
3.2)
Volunteerism
page 21
3.3)
The Management of Voluntary Organisations
page 26
3.4)
International Comparisons
page 31
4) Concluding Comments and Observations
page 38
5) Potential Future Research Directions
page 42
6) References
page 46
7) Articles included in the systematic review
page 49
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy (ISLP) at Loughborough University was
commissioned by Sport England to conduct a review of the academic evidence on the
role of voluntary sports clubs. Sport England identified the following areas as being the
focus for the review:

Club facilities

Club management/constitutional arrangements

Relationships with the educational sector

Relationships with the public sector

Relationships with the commercial sector

The needs of local communities, particularly in disadvantaged areas

The relationship between leisure professionals and volunteers
A systematic review procedure was chosen to conduct the academic review. The
systematic review procedure differs from a traditional narrative literature review as it
explicitly focuses on an objective, replicable, systematic and comprehensive search of
literature and research evidence.
As such, it was appropriate for this project because:

It incorporates rigorous and extensive search criteria

Comprehensiveness and quality control are ensured by the systematic review
panel

The review area is one where evidence may appear outside traditional peer
reviewed sources

The procedure ensures that the results of the review are based on the ‘best
available evidence’, and therefore any ‘gaps’ in the review can unequivocally be
attributed to gaps in the evidence rather than the shortcomings of the review
procedure.
The key words used in the literature search included: Multi(-)sport, Club, Facility(ies),
Social capital, Club management, Organis(z)ational structure, Club structure, Club
quality, Voluntary management, Volunteer quality, Volunteer structure, Volunteer,
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
2
Voluntary, Hub, Physical education, Sport, Youth, Provider, Modernis(z)ation,
Membership and Association.
Seven databases were searched: Sports Discus, Zetoc, Web of Science/Web of Science
Proceedings, IBSS, CABI Abstracts, Science Direct and Lexis Nexis.
The initial search returned a total of 5578 documents. Through the systematic review
process of abstract review, evaluation of relevance and quality, and further panel
discussions, 104 documents were retrieved for analysis. These were distributed among
the expert panel for full review and consequently, 39 documents were excluded on the
basis of relevance and quality. Thus, the review reported here comprises 65 documents.
The following themes and sub-themes emerged from the subsequent detailed analysis:

The Voluntary Context: (sub-themes: The characteristics of the voluntary sector
and Support for voluntary organisations)

Volunteerism: (sub-themes: Volunteer profiles, The linkage between formal and
informal volunteering and the Benefits of volunteering)

The Management of Voluntary Organisations: (sub-themes: Organisational
commitment, The professionalisation of sports clubs and Governance and ‘how
to manage’).
In addition, a collection of international material was analysed and the themes that
emerged from this are presented in the report.
The review of documents identified three reoccurring points. First, for a variety of
reasons, the research reviewed suggested an uncertain future for voluntary
organisations. Second, it was argued that researchers should avoid the tendency to
generalise research findings to all types of voluntary organisation, which suggests that
research in one area, with one type of voluntary organisation, in one context, may not
be transferable to other contexts. This makes the case for research into specific
contexts. Third, most authors agreed that there is a need to do more research in this
area. This review identified a limited amount of relevant literature and even less
research based material applicable to the sport context and a key finding of the
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
3
systematic review was that there is a major void in genuinely evaluative research on the
voluntary sports sector.
The systematic review process also identified the following:

There is no evidence-based research on facility use

There is no research on structures or constitutional arrangements

There is very little relevant research on the management of voluntary
organsations

There is negligible material on partnerships with education

There is virtually no research on multi-sport environments or clubs

More fundamentally, there is no research whatsoever on the role of voluntary
sports clubs in developing, providing for, encouraging, enhancing or detracting
from sports participation.
There are a number of implications that arise from the systematic review of literature.
First, the review suggests that volunteers do not want to be managed, nor in many cases
do they wish to be responsible for the management of others. While sport largely
depends on formal volunteering, volunteers mainly prefer informal volunteering. This
suggests that the use of voluntary sports clubs as a policy tool for delivering
participation and performance goals, may lead to a lack of volunteer commitment and
problems in recruiting and retaining volunteers.
Second, the review suggests a need to be sensitive to the context for and type of
voluntary organisations when considering the transferability of research findings. That
is not to say that research is not transferable, but that typological and contextual factors
should be considered.
Finally, there is an almost universal call for research into voluntary sports clubs. This
systematic review shows that if policy for voluntary sports club development is to be
evidence based, then primary research needs to be conducted to provide such evidence.
In response to the findings of the systematic review, three areas of research are
proposed: The first is an evaluation of the ‘state of play’ of voluntary provision in
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
4
England. It is recommended that typological research, utilising a qualitative cross-case
comparative approach, should be undertaken to understand the way in which a range of
typical or ‘ideal’ types of club operate, taking care to also evaluate their local and
sporting context.
Second an investigation of the potential of alternative sport delivery mechanisms is felt
appropriate given the increasing interest in multi-sport delivery mechanisms. An
ideographic approach to such research would be needed, probably centring on
qualitative interviews.
Finally, a programme of ‘Action Research’ of pilot projects specifically established to
investigate a range of delivery mechanism would establish a number of voluntary sport
club projects as illustrative examples of potential delivery mechanisms, with evaluation
and research feedback built-in from the outset.
Although these proposal are resource intensive and do not suggest an immediate
direction for policy affecting the voluntary sports club sector, what this review has
unequivocally shown is that if policy for voluntary sports clubs is to be evidence based,
then primary empirical research needs to be commissioned to provide such evidence.
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
5
1) Introduction
The Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy (ISLP) at Loughborough University was
commissioned by Sport England to conduct a review of the academic evidence on the
role of voluntary sports clubs. The ISLP team comprises co-project supervisors (Dr
Mike Weed, Dr Leigh Robinson), a research associate (Ms Elesa Argent) and an expert
review panel (Dr Mick Green, Prof Ian Henry, Prof Barrie Houlihan, Dr Paul
Downward).
Initially, the context for the review was provided by the ISLP’s understanding of
contemporary issues affecting the voluntary sector as outlined in our bid document.
While the voluntary sector has rightly been seen as ‘the backbone of British sport’,
voluntary sports clubs have not perhaps been as influential as they might have been in
delivering opportunities leading to lifelong participation, widening access, and
providing an entry point to performance sport. The British tradition is one of
fragmentation, with most clubs being focussed on single sports and thus much of the
work of England’s 106 400 affiliated sports clubs (Sport England, 2003) involves a
potentially unnecessary duplication of effort. While sports clubs on the continent have
long been ‘multi-sport’, largely arising out of the union movement, such structures
have not been part of British voluntary provision.
As funding from the National Lottery declines over the coming years, and the
population ages, voluntary sport will face a number of challenges in even maintaining
its current level of membership. Sport England has identified school-club links,
partnerships with the public and commercial sectors, and multi-sport ‘hubs’ and
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
6
‘networks’ as potentially providing the way forward for the voluntary sector (Moore,
2004). Other issues, identified in Driving Up Participation in Sport (Rowe, Adams and
Beasley, 2004 )and drawn from analysis by the Henley Centre (2003), include the
challenges of increasing participation among women (which despite increases in the
1980s and 1990s, still lags significantly behind that of men, particularly in less affluent
areas), increasing participation among ethnic minority groups, and increasing
participation among social groups D and E. In addition, despite the fragmentation of
traditional family households, family life is still important to much of the population,
and this has implications for voluntary provision. Finally, the importance of ‘wellbeing’ linked to a healthy body and mind and a secure social situation dovetails with
the spectre of what is perceived as a more dangerous society, particularly in relation to
street crime and child abuse, to provide further challenges for the voluntary sector.
As a result of a range of ongoing and previous work, the ISLP has a full appreciation of
these issues and broader influences. Current collaborative work between the ISLP and
the Institute of Youth Sport (IYS) on a number of projects focuses on the development
of school-club links. In addition, research on sports participation and the household and
on the nature of provision by the public and commercial sector and, in particular, by
partnerships between the two, informs our appreciation of the context for voluntary
sector provision. Our links with the European Association of Sports Management
enable us to access continental research on the voluntary sector, while our broader
appreciation of sports structures in a range of countries around the world facilitate the
incorporation of international perspectives into the review. The ISLP has a long
tradition of research associated with social inclusion and sport, and more recent
research conducted in collaboration with the IYS focuses on the role of the family in
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
7
supporting sport. This social inclusion work also identifies the importance of sport, and
specifically sports club membership, in contributing to social capital and thus bringing
broader health and well-being benefits. Finally, work supported by the Football
Association assessing their Charter Standard Club accreditation scheme also
incorporates a review of accreditation schemes across a range of sports that can help to
provide the ‘peace of mind’ of a secure environment for parents of young sports people.
The ISLP’s appreciation of the range of issues affecting the voluntary sector provided
the initial context for the review. However, Sport England also identified a number of
specific objectives for the review, which focused on seven key areas:

Club facilities

Club management/constitutional arrangements

Relationships with the educational sector

Relationships with the public sector

Relationships with the commercial sector

The needs of local communities, particularly in disadvantaged areas

The relationship between leisure professionals and volunteers
While the review has returned literature relating to these areas, it should be noted at the
outset that genuine studies researching what works in the voluntary sports sector are
few and far between. As such, this review draws heavily on generic research on the
voluntary sector and from management studies. Consequently, the final analysis of the
implications of this research for the role of voluntary sports clubs will be, to a certain
extent, speculative.
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
8
Given that the use of the systematic review method is intended to avoid speculative
conclusions, the central finding of the academic review is that there is a major void in
genuinely evaluative research on the voluntary sports sector.
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
9
2) The Review Strategy
2.1) The Systematic Review Procedure
In Britain central government has, since the 1980s, placed an increasing emphasis on
ensuring that policy and practice are informed through ‘a more rigorous and
challenging evidence base’ (Tranfield & Denyer, 2002). There has been a general
concern for the effectiveness of service delivery, and since 1997 an ‘evidence-based
movement’ has developed under successive New Labour governments (Davies, Nutley
& Smith, 2000). This has seen the utilisation of best evidence systematic reviews to
inform policy in urban regeneration (Dabinett, Lawless, Rhodes & Tyler, 2001),
nursing (Evans & Pearson, 2001), housing (Davies, Nutley & Smith, 1999; Maclennan
& More, 1999), social care (Macdonald, 1999) and criminal justice (Laycock, 2000).
Furthermore, in 2001 the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) funded the
establishment of an ‘Evidence Network’ (www.evidencenetwork.org) of multidisciplinary centres dedicated to the improvement of the evidence base for policy and
practice in the social sciences. This Evidence Network has promoted and developed the
use of the Systematic Review procedure to collate research evidence and inform policy
development, and it is this procedure that has been used to conduct this academic
review of the role of voluntary clubs.
The systematic review procedure differs from a traditional narrative literature review as
it explicitly focuses on an objective, replicable, systematic and comprehensive search
of literature and research evidence (Klassen, Jahad & Moher, 1998). As such it has
been seen by organisations such as NICE (National Institute for Clinical Excellence)
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
10
and the ESRC as providing a more comprehensive and transparent method for
assembling the ‘best evidence’ to inform policy than traditional reviews of literature.
Systematic review utilises an expert panel to establish protocols and search criteria for
a particular area of study, whilst also establishing criteria to assess the quality of the
research reviewed (Boaz, Ashby & Young, 2002). More recent approaches to
systematic review have extended the role of the panel to provide ‘Delphi’-type expert
input that assists in identifying sources of ‘grey’ literature that might not be readily
apparent through a search of peer-reviewed material (Moyer, Maule, Cameron, 2003).
In fact, the incorporation of ‘grey’ literature, such as conference papers, discussion
documents and a range of other unpublished materials, into the systematic review
process has been one of the major reasons for its widespread adoption in informing
policy development in the range of diverse areas identified above.
In the sport field, the systematic review procedure has been widely used in assessing
evidence in relation to health policy and exercise take-up and adherence (eg, Biddle,
Wang, Kavussanu, & Spray, 2003; Hausenblas & Symons Downs, 2002). More
recently, the procedure has been utilised in the sport policy field, and the ISLP has been
one of the first organisations to publish both the results of such reviews and
considerations for the methodological development of the procedure (eg Weed, 2005).
Recent systematic reviews of the sport policy field include: sport and refugees and
asylum seekers (Amara et al, 2005), women and sport administration in china (Chin,
2005), sports tourism knowledge and method (Weed, 2004), and the transferability of
sport skills to the business environment (Argent, 2004).
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
11
The systematic review procedure was therefore chosen to conduct this academic review
of research evidence on the role of voluntary sports clubs for a number of reasons:

It incorporates a rigorous and extensive search criteria

Comprehensiveness and quality control are ensured by the systematic review
panel

The review area is one where evidence may appear outside traditional peer
reviewed sources

The procedure ensures that the results of the review are based on the ‘best
available evidence’, and therefore any ‘gaps’ in the review can unequivocally be
attributed to gaps in the evidence rather than the shortcomings of the review
procedure.
2.2) The Systematic Review of Voluntary Sports Club Research
As with all systematic reviews, the systematic review of voluntary sports club research
commenced with the first meeting of the systematic review panel. This meeting
established the protocol for the search, and identified both the databases to be searched
and the search techniques and criteria. Given the ten year review period, it was decided
to include documents from 1994 onwards. The keywords to be used for the search were
discussed and an initial list drawn up. It was decided that the following databases
would be searched:

Sports Discus (peer reviewed & ‘grey’ sport literature)

Zetoc (peer reviewed & ‘grey’ business and management literature)
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
12

Web of Science/Web of Science Proceedings (peer reviewed and ‘grey’
literature in a range of disciplines)

IBSS (peer reviewed and ‘grey’ social science literature)

CABI Abstracts (peer reviewed leisure literature)

Science Direct (peer reviewed social science literature)

Lexis Nexis (press articles)
Finally, fulfilling its ‘Delphi’ role, the panel identified various organisations to be
contacted including: EASM (European Association for Sport Management), NASSM
(North American Society for Sport Management), ANZALS (Australia and New
Zealand Association for Leisure Studies), SMAANZ (Sport Management Association
of Australia and New Zealand), ICHSSPE (International Council for Health, Sport
Science and Physical Education), CCPR (Central Council for Physical Recreation),
NCVO (National Council for Voluntary Organisations), IYS (Institute of Youth Sport),
YST (Youth Sport Trust), WLRA (World Leisure and Recreation Association).
The initial search, established at the first panel meeting, filtered documents for
relevance based on keyword searching and on a pragmatic criteria that combined
keywords until the return for any one keyword/keyword combination fell below 200 for
any one database. A total of 5578 documents were returned from this initial search. The
keywords used and the relevant returns are shown in Table 1. Note that the numbers
refer to all the searches and, in some cases (eg ‘sport’), refer to the keyword combined
with other keywords. For brevity, however, only the ‘lead’ keyword is given in the
table.
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
13
Table 1:
Initial Search Returns
Keyword
Returns
Keyword
Returns
Keyword
Returns
Multi(-)sport
130
Club
99
Facility(ies)
207
Social capital
132
Club management
83
39
Club structure
8
Club quality
3
Volunteer quality
3
Volunteer structure
1
Organis(z)ational
structure
Voluntary
management
Volunteer
163
8
Voluntary
244
Hub
146
Physical education
294
Sport
418
Youth
373
Crime
22
Participation
352
Network
284
School
291
Provision
234
Provider
165
Recreation
322
Leisure
623
Modernis(z)ation
10
Programme
3
Membership
85
Association
219
Sector
84
Trust
58
Strategy
271
Development
204
TOTAL RETURNS
5578
The 5500 plus documents were filtered for relevance based on a review of their titles by
the two project supervisors, and abstracts were retrieved for 600 documents. The 600
abstracts were distributed to the expert panel for review, which met, together with
Malcolm Tungatt of Sport England, to discuss which documents should be retrieved in
full, and to identify any gaps or further possible searches. As a result of this meeting,
some further searches were conducted, and 120 documents were identified for retrieval
in full. For a variety of reasons 16 of these documents were irretrievable (in the case of
conference papers, for example, there may not have been a full text document, only an
abstract of a presentation). The 104 documents that were retrieved were then distributed
among the panel for full review according to areas of expertise, and following a further
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
14
panel meeting, 39 documents were excluded on the basis of relevance and quality.
Consequently, the final review summarised here comprises 65 documents.
While organisations such as the Cochrane collaboration (www.cochrane.org) and
Campbell collaboration (www.campbellcollaboration.org) advocate the use of strict
pre-determined quality criteria for systematic reviews, this is largely directed at reviews
searching for quantitative evidence, and often the quality criteria relate to method (eg,
restricting included studies to those using randomised controlled trials). Clearly, the use
of such criteria was not relevant for this study. Other authors (eg, Murphy, Dingwall,
Greatbach & Watson, 1998; Mays & Pope, 2000) have drawn up ‘checklists’ for the
evaluation of the quality of qualitative papers. However, many other authors argue that
the quality of studies should be established in the process of the analysis (eg Noblit &
Hare, 1988), as it is more important not to miss relevant studies (eg Sherwood, 1997;
Walsh & Doone, 2005). Consequently, no formal quality markers were set a priori for
the analysis. Exclusions on the basis of quality were only made on the basis of an
article’s full text, and those studies that were excluded on the basis of quality were
most often excluded because either they contained no secondary or empirical evidence
or they were not theoretically underpinned.
The 600 abstracts initially considered by the panel comprised around 33% from ‘grey’
literature sources. However, much of this material was either very simplistic ‘how-to’
advice, or was conference papers that had subsequently been written up as peerreviewed articles which were included in the review. Consequently, there is less ‘grey’
literature than might be expected in the final review, largely due to its generally poor
quality.
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
15
The ‘how-to’ documents were not limited to the ‘grey’ literature as a significant
majority of the peer reviewed material fell into this category. Such documents are of
little use in a review such as this as they are not ‘research-based’, but are speculative
based on a mixture of personal experience, conceptual discussion or theoretical
modelling. A disappointingly high proportion of the material identified in the initial
searches as being potentially relevant lacked any real research base.
The systematic review strategy resulted in the review encompassing a wide range of
diverse sources. For example, alongside material from sources that might have been
expected to be included, such as ‘Journal of Sport Management’, ‘Journal of Parks and
Recreation’ and ‘European Sport Management Quarterly’, articles were included from
sources such as ‘International Corporate Rescue Journal’, ‘The Fletcher Forum of
World Affairs’, ‘Youth Studies Australia’, ‘Therapeutic Recreation Journal’ and
‘Voluntas’. As such, the review that follows is based on a broad range of material
relevant to the role of voluntary sports organisations rather than on what would have
been a much narrower range of material about the role of voluntary sports
organisations.
Finally, before commencing the thematic analysis, some health warnings about the
analysis, derived from the nature of the material reviewed, need to be given. As noted
earlier, very few of the 65 documents included in the review are research based, and as
such there is a genuine lack of an evidence base relating to voluntary sports clubs.
Consequently, much current recommended practice in the development of voluntary
sports clubs, both in the UK and overseas, is based on anecdote and intuition. This is
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
16
notwithstanding the expanding number of ‘club development’ schemes operated by
national governing bodies and often derived from Sport England’s Clubmark scheme
(e.g., FA Charter Standard, ASA Swim 21). Such schemes are almost exclusively about
quality assurance and focus on issues such as child protection and coach education
rather than on the operation of voluntary sports clubs.
The comprehensive and rigorous nature of the systematic review methodology leads to
a much greater level of certainty that the thematic analysis that follows is based on the
best available evidence. That a number of issues that might have been considered
relevant to the role of voluntary sports clubs are missing is unequivocally a limitation
of the current literature rather than the conduct of the review.
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
17
3) Thematic Analysis
Further and more detailed analysis of the studies identified by the systematic review
process has led to a refinement of the themes outlined in the preliminary report. The
following three themes have emerged from this more detailed analysis, which serves to
reinforce the paucity of the research-based studies in this area:

The Voluntary Context

Volunteerism

The Management of Voluntary Organisations
In addition, a collection of international material has been analysed and the themes that
emerged from this are presented at the end of this section.
There are a number of sub-themes within each theme and these will be discussed
below. However, underpinning all of the themes and sub-themes were three reoccurring
points.
First, the research reviewed suggests an uncertain future for voluntary organisations,
focusing on how voluntary activity is decreasing significantly within some groups, how
volunteers have been marginalized by an increase in professional staff and how the
need for voluntary clubs may decrease as sport and leisure activities become
increasingly individualised. In summary, the future appears bleak for voluntary clubs.
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
18
Second, it is argued that researchers should avoid the tendency to generalise research
findings to all types of voluntary organisation. Indeed, in her research with voluntary
associations, Glanville (2004) has argued strongly against the generalisation of research
suggesting that the type of voluntary association and its characteristics should be
considered when examining the impact of membership on a variety of outcomes. This
suggests that research in one area, with one type of voluntary organisation, in one
context, may not be transferable to other contexts, making an argument for research
into specific contexts.
This links to the final point, which is the need to do more research in this area. This
review identified a limited amount of relevant literature and even less research based
material applicable to the sport context. It is apparent that there is a need for additional
research in order to inform policy and to assist decision-making about this sector.
3.1) The Voluntary Context
Two main themes emerged from the literature in this category, which are discussed
below:
The characteristics of the voluntary sector
There is an abundance of literature that describes the characteristics of the voluntary
sector and voluntary organisations. Nearly all of the articles reviewed provided this
information as context for their subsequent discussions and thus it is possible to get a
reasonable picture of the voluntary sectors of a number of different countries. For
example, Halfpenny and Reid (2002) discussed the composition of the voluntary sector
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
19
in the UK, the resources it commands, explanations for its existence and accounted for
differences between the public, private and voluntary sectors.
More than a decade ago, Horsch (1994) reported that in Germany, three times as many
people took part in sport in voluntary clubs as opposed to commercial sport facilities.
He went on to state that, at this time, Germany had about 80 000 sport clubs, with
approx. 24 million members; close to 30% of the population. More recently,
SportScotland (2001) produced a research report that defined clubs and their activities
and discussed how the clubs were operated. Their findings showed that there were
approximately 13000 sports clubs in Scotland and that 93% of these were single sport
clubs. Most clubs had less than 100 members and the biggest challenge facing these
clubs was to develop a sustainable future.
Support for voluntary organisations
The literature reviewed suggests the need for substantial public sector support of
voluntary organisations in order to not only support those who volunteer, but also to
enable voluntary organisations to meet objectives, or to deliver government priorities.
The nature of this support was discussed by Nichols et al (2003a) who identified how
volunteers need support in the form of volunteer resources and training programmes in
order to assist them to deliver priorities.
In terms of who should provide this support, earlier research by Nichols et al (1998)
noted that the most effective public sector support for volunteers comes from local
authorities. Their research identified a need for support in the areas of making lottery
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
20
applications, the provision and co-ordination of training for coaches and officials and
training in management, the provision of a network of volunteers and the development
of local directories of sport clubs. Nichols et al (1998: 125) went on to say that “the
most sensitive and effective public support is likely to be given by local authorities that
have the greatest understanding of local needs.”
Alternatively, it has been argued that voluntary organisations are not in need of support
and some authors have identified a trend for the incorporation of voluntary
organisations into the delivery of services. Authors point, often negatively, to a
development of a contract culture in voluntary organisations as a result of a shift to
voluntary organisations as service providers (Arai, 1999; Turner and Martin, 2004). For
example, Arai (1999) argued that providers must be aware of the implications of
decisions surrounding privatisation upon voluntary organisations, as she suggested that
privatisation creates a tension between service delivery and the goals of quality of life,
increasing citizenship and the enhancement of society (social capital).
3.2) Voluntarism
Three, interrelated themes emerged from the literature. These themes are now discussed
in turn.
Volunteer profiles
Most of the research on volunteering refers, to some extent, to the profiles of
volunteers, that is their motivation and socio-economic characteristics. However, a few
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
21
papers specifically emphasised these features. In the UK, Nichols and King (2000)
explored the Guide movement and identified that the motives for volunteering typically
changed over time. For example, long-term friendships developed subsequent to initial
involvement in the Guide movement because of children’s membership. Such longer
term commitment was also suggestive of an embracing of the ideals of the organisation.
Constraints on volunteering included other family commitments and the lack of time.
Such pressures were felt equally by volunteers because of the reduction of volunteers
overall.
These pressures are felt elsewhere. Shibli et al (1999) identified that sports club
volunteers typically got involved in the sport because they were specifically asked and
that the volunteer felt that it met some of their needs to provide sports opportunities.
Motivations were thus not specifically altruistic. However, these volunteers, compared
to other, more causal, volunteers tended to be higher educated, were in full-time
employment and did not have dependent children. Consequently they volunteered more
hours. These results are also indicative of the constraints that time and family life can
place on volunteering. Moreover, they indicated a form of ‘career’ path for volunteers,
which is a notion supported by Coleman’s (2002) analysis of volunteering in cricket in
the UK.
Such findings are not confined to the UK. De Knop et al (1999) found similar profiles
in a study of Dutch sports clubs. Specifically they found that parents were typically not
engaged in their child’s sports clubs and this was primarily because of time constraints,
though concern over their lack of competence, or that they did not get a variety of tasks
to do were also important barriers.
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
22
In terms of substantial work done with English sport clubs, a review of volunteering
was carried out by LIRC (2003) and a basic message of this substantial empirical
research was that there was a shortage of volunteers, and difficulty in recruitment.
There were also stark potential tensions identified between the formality of
organisations and volunteer aspirations. Volunteers do not want to be ‘managed’, or to
manage others.
The scale of sports volunteering can be understood by noting that 14.8% of adults
volunteered in sports. In terms of sports volunteers, 77.7% of these did so purely in a
formal, i.e. club or NGB-based, capacity, with 9.4% of them in an informal capacity.
The remainder engaged in mixed volunteering. Thus, of the organisations benefiting
from volunteer hours, 45% of volunteers were associated with the traditional club
organised by its members, and 22% were engaged in informal group volunteering. This
suggests that informal activity is a sizeable minority of volunteering. Finally,
approximately 42% of total volunteer hours can be attributed to unaffiliated activity
that is activity not governed by the NGBs (LIRC, 2003).
Cuskelly (2003) in an analysis of Australian Bureau of Statistics data on sports
participation and volunteering for 2002, found that sports volunteering tended to be
increasingly concentrated around specific types, and argued that this is likely to lead to
problems of supply provision unless participants or their families are encouraged to
volunteer. Likewise, it is important to ensure that clubs are managed effectively to
retain existing volunteers (Cuskelly, 1995). Finally, in a cross-country analysis of
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
23
voluntary association membership, Curtis et al (2001) identified that volunteering
tended to be associated with societies that emphasised multi-denominational
Christianity, had experience of democratic institutions and political systems, and high
levels of economic development. This suggests that formal volunteering has particular
cultural traits.
The linkage between formal and informal volunteering
The above discussion has shown that, particularly with sport, there appears to be a
strong-line drawn between formal and informal volunteering, with sports becoming
increasingly reliant on the former, which is imposing constraints on the system of
volunteer labour.
Though not related to sports, Wilson and Musick (1997) distinguished between formal
and informal volunteering using data from a large panel study in the US. They
identified that formal volunteering tended to be associated with the number of children
in the household, religion, socio-economic status and health, as well as a desire for
‘informal’ social intercourse. In contrast, and somewhat paradoxically, informal
volunteering was typically a function of health, gender and age. They also identified
that whilst formal volunteering can promote informal volunteering, the reciprocal is not
the case. This is suggestive of ‘barriers’ to formal volunteering.
To this end, Williams (2003), in a study of the UK Home Office Citizenship Survey for
2001, warns against policy initiatives that ignore informal activity. Importantly, this
volunteer activity tends to emanate from less affluent geographical areas, whose
curtailment might produce social exclusion.
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
24
Such warnings received theoretical and conceptual support in Hustinx and Lammertyn
(2003). They argued that the nature of modern societies, which has loosened
connections between its members, by changes to the family and work organisations,
may lead to the growing exclusion of less privileged groups and undermine traditional
volunteering patterns. These should be understood as embedded within particular sociocultural patterns.
Benefits of volunteering
Social capital features prominently as an argument for volunteering and the voluntary
sector, and the work of Boeck & Fleming, (2002); Hoover, (1996); McDonald &
Mutch, (2000); Nunn, (2000); Onyx, Leonard, & Hayward-Brown, (2003); Sixsmith &
Boneham, (2003) and Wollebaek & Selle, (2002) suggests that there are a number of
individual and social benefits that emerge from participation and the concept of active
citizenship is prevalent. However, Li, Savage, & Pickles, (2003) and Warde et al., 2003
point to the growing exclusion of less privileged groups from voluntary organisations
and voluntary activity. The studies reviewed argue that there is a decline in
membership of voluntary organisations and that this decline is more marked in lower
socio-economic groups and among women.
An interesting counterargument is also proposed by Nichols et al (2004), who have
argued that participation in voluntary sports clubs may actually emphasise exclusion,
rather than integration, as these clubs tend to be a cluster of people with similar interest
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
25
and values, which excludes those without these interests and values. Nichols et al
(2004: 50) suggested that
The very nature of voluntary sector clubs might lead them to exclude dissimilar
people because, although they represent a plurality of interest groups, each
group itself is a cluster of similar people with similar values.
This feature may actually undermine the social capital expected to be generated by
participation.
3.3) The Management of Voluntary Organisations
Three main themes emerged from the literature included in this category.
Organisational commitment
The literature that is encapsulated in this theme considers factors that generate and
maintain commitment to voluntary organisations. The research considers two broad
areas: cohesion and commitment.
In their research identifying factors that facilitated cohesion among committee
members, Doherty and Carron (2003) found that the size of committees affected
perceptions of cohesion, with larger committees being perceived as being less cohesive.
More importantly, however, they found that task and social cohesion predicted
volunteer satisfaction and effort, while task cohesion was linked to volunteer effort and
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
26
the intention to remain with the committee. This suggests that team building is
important for voluntary organisations, as is committee size. Doherty and Carron (2003:
135) concluded that:
…it is the task aspects predominantly that keep the group together. They unite
the group more effectively than social aspects and have important implications
for member effort, retention and committee effectiveness.
In terms of commitment to voluntary organisations, research carried out by Cuskully
(1995) also found a relationship between perceptions of effectiveness and commitment,
which was supported by later work done by Cuskelly, McIntyre and Boag (1998). This
work established that if volunteers felt that their committees were functioning
effectively, they were more committed to the organisation. The volunteers included in
their research were more likely to be committed to organisations that used an open
decision making process, resolved rather than suppressed conflicts and welcomed the
examination of group processes. This clearly supports the necessity for the principles of
good governance to be implemented into voluntary sport organisations.
It is interesting to note that neither piece of research found a relationship between
organisational commitment and the variables of age, income, occupation, length of
tenure, length of membership, length of time in current position, or length of
participation in the sport. Indeed, Cuskelly, McIntyre and Boag (1998) noted that the
variables that are considered important in paid work cohesiveness do not explain
volunteer cohesiveness, although subsequent research carried out Cuskully, McIntyre
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
27
and Boag (1999) did find a positive relationship between the length of time with the
organisation and commitment.
The professionalisation of sports clubs
Auld (1994) in early research on the management of volunteers, highlighted the
dangers of the professionalisation of voluntary clubs. He suggested that professionals
employed in voluntary organisations, need to be aware of the danger of pushing
volunteers away from key jobs in the organisation and argued that a sensitivity to the
needs of volunteers is required, as is the responsibility to mange the relationship
between professionals and volunteers in order to avoid volunteer apathy.
However, Enjolras (2002a) has argued that professionalism has had benefits for clubs
in Norway, outlining how it has allowed them to be managed professionally and as a
consequence, to access a greater proportion of public funds. He argued that
professionalism has led to commercialism and that these organisations:
…are also those receiving the highest degree of public authorities’ support, and
an increase in commercial income does not reduce the volume of voluntary
work.
(Enjolras, 2002a: 372)
These findings were also reported by Vernhoven et al (1997) in their paper on research
carried out with Flemish sport clubs.
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
28
Other research in this area has primarily focused on the relationship between the paid
Executive and the voluntary Board. On the whole, the research showed that the
relationship between the paid Executive and the voluntary Board needs to be perceived
as positive for the organisation to be perceived as functioning effectively (Hoyle and
Cuskelly, 2003, Hoye, 2003).
Hoye and Cuskelly (2003) established that there were four elements in this relationship
that relate to organisational performance. The first was a need for trust between the
Board and the Executive as this trust led to confidence in one another to fulfil the
respective roles. The second element was a perception that leadership of the
organisation was being shared by both parties. Third, it was clear from the research that
Board members were reliant on the Executive for information and that this also
required trust, while finally, the individual felt to be most responsible for Board
performance was the Board Chair, This final point was reinforced by additional
research in this area carried out by Hoye (2003) who found that the relationship
between Board Chairs and Executives, was perceived by both to be stronger with each
other, than with the rest of the Board, indicating shared Board leadership.
This research highlights the importance of fostering and maintaining trust between the
Executive and the Board as this is required in order for the organisation to function
effectively. Trust was manifest in the research outlined above, as the Board:
…trusting executives to carry out their decisions without undue monitoring,
executives being able to speak feely in board meetings without fear of
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
29
retribution and the Board trusting that proposals brought to it by their
executives were based on evidence.
(Hoye and Cuskelly, 2003: 67-68).
The absence of trust was perceived to create conflict, indecision and thus lower the
effectiveness of the organisation.
Governance and ‘how to manage’
There is a substantial amount of literature that presents best practice in the management
of volunteers and voluntary organisations. Although it is primarily descriptive and
often simplistic, the literature deals with a number of factors affecting governance and
effectiveness. For example, the State of Victoria, Australia (2002) has produced a
handbook aimed at assisting sport and recreation clubs to expand. The Handbook
contains a number of checklists, supplemented with case study examples.
From a research perspective, Merrill, (1996) outlined how clubs need to be structured
or restructured to address fiscal and managerial concerns in order to improve club
governance, while research carried out by Hoyle and Inglis (2003) established two
characteristics of voluntary organisations that are critical to governance. The first of
these is a balancing of the role and relationships between the paid Executives and the
voluntary Board, a point supported by earlier research carried out by Inglis (1997). The
second is the need to evaluate the performance of both of these groups and they argue
that:
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
30
…the Board should be responsible for evaluating individual board members
and the Board as a whole….The Board can monitor the performance of the
Executive through the executive’s monthly written reports to the board.
(Hoyle and Inglis, 2003: 383)
They went on to make the point that how board members are recruited, selected and
trained will have significant impacted on the performance of voluntary organisations.
This point was supported by Inglis (1997) who identified that the main selection criteria
used by Executive Directors in the selection of volunteers were “an interest in the work
of the organisation” and “having a proven track record to contribute the necessary
time”. Interestingly, her research showed that specific skills were not considered a
priority, which is not in line with the principles of good governance currently prevalent
in thinking surrounding sports organisations. One explanation for this finding is the age
of the research and research carried out more recently is likely to have found a greater
emphasis on skill-based selection criteria.
3.4) International Comparisons
The two over-riding themes running through this literature are that the ‘traditional’
sports club (organised, competitive sport activities) is in decline and that further
research is required in order to better understand this phenomenon.
Belgian research (De Knop, Theebom, De Martelaer, Van Puymbroeck, Wittock &
Wylleman, 1994; De Knop, Van Meerbeek, Vanreusel, Laporte, Theebom, Wittock &
De Martelaer, 1999; Verhoevon, Laporte, De Knop, Bollaert, Taks, & Vincke ,1999)
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
31
focused, in large part, on whether sports clubs have been threatened by the following
‘external’ changes or trends:

Demographic trends – decline in the population of youngsters;

Market trends – popularity of sports among youngsters is decreasing; leisure
activities have become more informal, less organised, individualised; the
growing popularity of practising sports in the private sphere (at home);

Institutional trends – the growth of commercial providers, for example, “the
commercial sports school, where people ‘buy’ sports whenever they want,
without being affiliated” (De Knop et al, 1999: 40); increase in the number of
multi-sport clubs;

Socio-economic trends – there still remains a ‘class bias’ in favour of higher
socio-economic groups; flexible working hours (part-time, weekend and night
work) result in less opportunities to take part in competitive, organised
activities;
The German research (Horch 1994, 1996) concentrated on the (inevitable?) growth in
size of voluntary sports organisations and the consequent tendency for them to become
“more commercial, bureaucratic, professional and oligarchic” (Horch, 1996: 46). One
key conclusion from this research was that “if a sport club treats its members as
customers it ought not complain if they also act like customers and are no longer
willing to volunteer” (Horch, 1996: 54).
Seippel’s (2002, 2004) research, in Norway, centred on investigating problems in
recruiting volunteers to voluntary sports organisations. A key finding from this work is
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
32
that volunteers carry out a high percentage of the work performed in Norwegian sports
organisations. However, it was also noted that where these voluntary sports
organisations are increasingly “dependent upon people with specific formal
knowledge” (Seippel, 2002: 268), this could present a threat to the more traditional
organisational characteristics of a voluntary organisation, e.g. self-help, independence
from the state or the market, democratic decision-making and obligation to members.
Seippel’s conclusions are, however, somewhat inconclusive. On the one hand:
“Dependence on formal knowledge might … decrease the autonomy of voluntary
organisations, making them more dependent on state and market actors” (Seippel,
2002: 268). On the other hand, “it is also important and necessary to realise that
increased knowledge also enhances the ability to develop effective organisations”
(Seippel, 2002: 268).
Elsewhere, Seippel (2004: 223) noted that, for countries such as Norway, Germany and
Belgium, a major problem was the mobilisation of volunteers. In this article, Seippel
identifies that four sets of ‘obstacles’ stand out as important for sports clubs in Norway:
volunteers, economy, institutional relations and facilities. However, he goes on to state
that:
When clubs were forced to determine which of these they consider to be most
pressing, problems with recruiting people – both volunteers, leaders and
trainers – were clearly most important.
(Seippel, 2004: 229)
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
33
The research conducted in the Netherlands (Deckers & Gratton, 1995) was based on a
comparative study with Great Britain that centred on investigating issues around “the
increasing numbers of sports participants that take part in sport outside the traditional
sports club structure” (Deckers & Gratton, 1995: 117). They suggested that there was a
close relationship between government and sports clubs in the Netherlands and other
European countries, such as Germany and Denmark, which “is completely different
from the British situation, where clubs get no special benefits from government and
where most clubs must generate all of their income” (Deckers & Gratton, 1995: 120).
Interestingly, at this time, it was suggested that “in some Dutch sports, clubs are losing
members whereas the number of sports clubs and sports club membership is increasing
in Britain” (Deckers & Gratton, 1995: 120). Perhaps even more illuminating given
concerns regarding sports club memberships, Deckers and Gratton (1995) noted that
despite the lack of government intervention British sports clubs seemed to be
flourishing, which led them to conclude that:
…there is some evidence that the sports club structure that is common in
Scandinavian countries, the Netherlands and Germany, with high levels of
government financial support, runs the risk of being unresponsive to consumer
demand in the same way that government itself fails in its attempt to meet
consumer demand for collective goods.
(Deckers & Gratton, 1995: 131)
In Canada and Australia there is also some evidence, in some sports, that sports clubs at
the grassroots level are struggling to meet the various demands placed upon them, such
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
34
as balancing the needs of the aspiring elite athlete with those of the traditional club
membership. In Canada, for example, Nick Thierry, editor of the Canadian swimming
magazine SwimNews has argued that “Our club system, once the strongest in the world
in the 1970s and 1980s, is now moribund” (Personal communication, 3 July 2002).
Harvey (1997: 13) suggested that Canadian swimming clubs should look to “the clubowned facility [which] has become quite popular recently in the United States and
Australia” (for a more detailed critique of the Canadian swimming club structure, see
also Tihanyi 2001a, 2001b).
In an article that investigated compulsory volunteer programmes for young people in
Australia, Warburton and Smith (2003) point to a broader political and policy shift that
was being paralleled by the Labour Government, in the UK. Warburton and Smith
(2003) argued that the neo-liberal ideology, underlying welfare provision in Australia,
reflected “new values [which] identify citizenship less with membership of a social
community and more with active participation in that community” (Warburton and
Smith 2003: 774). Moreover, they suggested that “Citizenship is attained through
active participation, and the discourse of government is about encouraging active
participation rather than passive receipt of welfare” (Warburton and Smith, 2003:
774).
This broad political shift has been identified in the Australian sport sector with regard
to changing policies in relation to sports club membership. Indeed, Stewart et al. (2004)
noted that there has been an important shift in the latest federal government sport
policy statement, Backing Australia’s Sporting Ability (BASA) (Commonwealth of
Australia, 2001: 92):
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
35
The emphasis on the provision of opportunities for physical activity has been
replaced by an emphasis on encouraging Australians to return to the clubbased sport system, as a way of increasing participation. In BASA a policy goal
is to significantly increase the number of people participating in sport right
across Australia. Importantly, this policy goal focuses on participation in
organised sport, rather then participation in unstructured physical activity. In
other words, BASA assumes that we will be better off as a nation if people join
clubs and play their sport in a more structured setting.
This policy has also been about building social capital:
The emphasis on strengthening sporting clubs reflects a fear that Australians
are increasingly becoming more individualistic, distant and removed from their
communities. In this respect the sporting club is viewed as a social and
communal panacea.
(Stewart et al. 2004, p. 93)
This argument is set against a background of falling sports participation levels in
Australia: “Only 31 per cent of adult Australians regularly engage in organised sport,
which is seriously below the 40 per cent participation rate for 1948” (Stewart et al,
2004: 190). However, it is also noted what BASA does not address. The emphasis on
club sport as a way of attracting more members and players does not fit comfortably
with how people see the place of sport and physical activity in their daily levels in
Australia. The “Australian Bureau of Statistics showed that for many of the most
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
36
popular Australian sports, the majority of people engaged with them in an informal
way” (Stewart et al. 2004: 95). These authors concluded that there is a danger in:
…only using organised club-based sport as the vehicle to increase participation
levels. Put simply, focusing exclusively on club-based sport may alienate
sections of the Australian population, thereby increasing the number of
Australians who do not participate in regular physical activity.
(Stewart et al, 2004: 96)
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
37
4) Concluding Comments & Observations
Within the context of the aims set out by Sport England for this review (see page 6), it
is possible to report the following:

There is no evidence-based research on facility use

There is no research on structures or constitutional arrangements

There is very little relevant research on the management of voluntary
organsations, although some research on executive-board relations may be
relevant to NGBs

There is negligible material on partnerships with education, which is surprising
given the emphasis placed on dual use for over 20 years

There is virtually no research on multi-sport environments or clubs, which is
also surprising given the amount of European research retrieved
The majority of the research retrieved related to the profiles and motivations of
volunteers, although the minority of this was in the sports context. However, there are
some implications that can be drawn from this research on motivations and profiles for
voluntary sports club policy (see below). There was also some limited material on the
profile of voluntary clubs (numbers and types), but this was little more than ‘bean
counting’. There was no research on the operation of voluntary sports clubs.
More fundamentally, there was no research whatsoever on the role of voluntary sports
clubs in developing, providing for, encouraging, enhancing or detracting from sports
participation. Consequently, this review can only suggest implications for providing for
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
38
sports participation through voluntary sports clubs derived from the evidence on the
nature of volunteering and voluntarism in sport.
At the start of the thematic review, three overarching themes from the research were
identified:

An uncertain future for voluntary clubs as a result of marginalisation of
volunteers (due to increasing professionalisation) and an increasing
individualisation of sport and leisure activity consumption

The dangers of generalising specific research findings to all voluntary contexts
without a detailed consideration of both the type and nature of voluntary
organisations, and of the context in which such organisations operate

The need for policy for voluntary sports clubs to be ‘evidence-based’, but the
lack of any evidence base upon which to do this
A key question in relation to the first point is about the fundamental aim for voluntary
sports clubs – do they exist as service providers, agents of policy to deliver
governmental and national agency goals relating to sporting performance and sport and
physical activity participation, or do they exist for their members and volunteers, to
develop quality of life, increase citizenship and enhance society through developing
social capital. Of course, the answer is both, but the review identified a clear tension
here. In striving to make more effective provision, voluntary clubs need help with tasks
such as accounting and making lottery applications, which would seem to indicate that
the involvement of professionals would be a good thing. Also, some of the research
shows that volunteer commitment derives from the effective functioning of the
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
39
organisation, particularly its committees and decision-making processes. However,
research also shows that volunteers do not want to be managed, nor in many cases do
they wish to be responsible for the management of others. While sport largely depends
on formal volunteering, volunteers mainly prefer informal volunteering. The
implication here is that while there may be a temptation to see voluntary sports clubs as
a policy tool for delivering participation and performance goals, to treat them as such
may lead to a lack of volunteer commitment and problems in recruiting and retaining
volunteers. This will inevitably be detrimental to the voluntary sports club sector, and
ultimately to levels of formal sports participation. That is not to say that voluntary
sports clubs may not be able to contribute to these policy aims, just that considerable
care needs to be taken when developing policy that encourages them to do so.
The second point above relates to the need to be sensitive to the context for and type of
voluntary organisations when considering the transferability of research findings.
Clearly there are differences in the motivations of those who volunteer to support a
charity such as Oxfam, and those who volunteer as sports club committee members.
That is not to say that research is not transferable, but that typological and contextual
factors should be considered. Consequently, it may be possible to draw lessons from
similar types of voluntary (or even some non-voluntary) organisations in similar
contexts, and this has some implications for future research.
Finally, the third point highlights the almost universal call that is made in the articles
reviewed, for further research into voluntary sports clubs. In fact, the term ‘further
research’ is a misnomer, because the systematic review shows that, to date, there has
been virtually no empirical research conducted on the management and policy of the
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
40
voluntary sports club sector. As noted in the discussions of the systematic review
procedure in the early parts of this report, there has been an increasing focus by
government on ensuring that policy is informed by the ‘best available evidence’
(Tranfield and Denyer, 2002). In many areas of policy, systematic review has been seen
as the appropriate tool to separate fact from fiction and evidence from folklore in
informing policy decisions. One of the key features of systematic review is that it
identifies high quality research in a field and filters out poor quality evidence.
However, in the case of voluntary sports clubs, there is no high quality research, and
therefore there is no evidence base from which to make policy. As such, this systematic
review shows that if policy for voluntary sports club development is to be evidence
based, then primary research needs to be conducted to provide such evidence. It is to
potential areas for such future research that the final section of this report now turns.
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
41
5) Potential Future Research Directions
Following the presentation of these findings to Sport England in May 2005, it was
suggested that it would be useful to consider in concluding this report the extent to
which voluntary sports clubs can ‘drive up and sustain regular sports participation’.
While this was not part of the original remit for the review, some comments on the use
of voluntary sports clubs as agents of policy were made in the concluding comments.
Specifically, that there is a very precarious balance between using clubs as part of
national policy initiatives, and disillusioning current and potential volunteers in such
clubs. Any initiatives that seek to use clubs as agents of sports participation policy must
therefore be sensitive to the needs of volunteers if the contribution that such volunteers
make to sport is to be sustained. Therefore, bearing in mind this fundamental tension,
three potential areas for future research are suggested:
(1)
An evaluation of the ‘state of play’ of voluntary provision in England
Such research would need to do more that simply count the number and size of
voluntary sports clubs and the extent of the sports opportunities they provide. It would
need to assess, inter alia, the ways in which provision is made, how clubs are organised
to serve their members, how they negotiate access to facilities and what agreements
they have reached (if any) with local commercial and educational providers. Such
research cannot be fully and effectively conducted by quantitative surveys. Typological
research, utilising a qualitative cross-case comparative approach, should be undertaken
to understand the way in which a range of typical or ‘ideal’ types of club operate,
taking care to also evaluate their local and sporting context. Research of this nature
should contribute to an understanding of ‘what works, in which situations, and for
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
42
whom’ (Solesbury, 2002), and thus help to ensure that future policy initiatives are
sustainable because they would be sensitive to the aspirations of volunteers and
voluntary sector providers in sport.
(2)
An investigation of the potential of alternative sport delivery mechanisms
Given the increasing interest in multi-sport delivery mechanisms, research could be
established to investigate the lessons that can be learned from a range of existing multisport environments. Such environments include, but are not limited to: multi-sport
clubs (the SportsScotland research (2001) suggests there are over 900 of these in
Scotland); multi-sport venues such as public sector ‘sports parks’ and larger leisure
centres as well as private sector multi-sport or multi-activity zones; multi-sport activity
providers, such as university athletic unions and ‘after school’ and youth clubs; shared
facility use, such as dual-use of school and college facilities or jointly owned facilities
(e.g. cricket/hockey); and, school sport provision, which has always been ‘multi-sport’.
An ideographic approach to such research would be needed, probably centring around
qualitative interviews. This would ensure, as with (1) above, that policy could be
developed that is sustainable and sensitive to the needs of clubs and providers.
(3)
‘Action Research’ of pilot projects specifically established to investigate
a range of delivery mechanisms.
This approach would involve establishing a number of voluntary sport club projects as
illustrative examples of potential delivery mechanisms, with evaluation and research
feedback built-in from the outset. Given the lack of any evidence base to suggest
potential structures, a range of approaches would need to be trialled, with a recognition
of the need to be flexible and adapt approaches as the club(s)/partnership(s) develop.
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
43
The evaluation feedback loop would help such clubs/partnerships to develop and adapt
according to the needs and aspirations of the volunteers and participants involved. For
this approach to have any long-term impact, significant investment must be made in the
ongoing evaluation of the pilot projects to ensure that the lessons learned can inform
future policy.
These suggested areas for research into the operation of the voluntary club sector
represent three different approaches. The first option seeks to learn from current
practice in voluntary sports club operation and provision, about which, as this review
has shown, very little is known. The second option assumes that current practice needs
to be adapted and that some form of multi-sport approach is appropriate. It seeks to
inform such new directions from a range of current delivery mechanisms from which
lessons for voluntary sports clubs might be drawn. The third option seeks to both learn
from and develop a range of illustrative pilot projects, focussing on an action research
model of concurrent evaluation and development. The most appropriate approach will
depend on the assumptions made about current provision. If it is assumed that the best
of current voluntary sports club provision can be a model for future practice, then (1)
above is most appropriate. If it is assumed that the best of current common practice can
be improved upon, and that clubs would be best served by some form of multi-sport
environment, then (2) above may be the most relevant approach. Option (3) offers an
opportunity to ‘test theories’ about voluntary sports club provision, and to examine
what could work. It is unlikely to be a successful strategy in isolation, and would be
best employed alongside either of the first two.
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
44
Of course, in an ideal world, with unlimited time and resources, the above three areas
of research would be carried out in sequence. While this is unlikely to be a realistic
option, what this review has unequivocally shown is that if policy for voluntary sports
clubs is to be evidence based, then primary empirical research needs to be
commissioned to provide such evidence.
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
45
6) References
Amara, M., Aquilina, D., Argent, E., Betzer-Tayar, M., Coalter, F., Green, M., Henry,
I.P. & Taylor, J. (2005). The Roles of Sport and Education in the Social
Inclusion of Asylum Seekers and Refugees: An Evaluation of policy and practice
in the UK (Report to the European Commission, DG Education & Culture).
Loughborough: Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University.
Argent, E. (2004). From the Locker Room to the Board Room: Developing Leaders
through Sport. Paper to the 12th European Association of Sport Management
Congress, Ghent, Belgium, September.
Biddle, S. J. H., Wang, C. K. J., Kavussanu, M., & Spray, C. M. (2003). Correlates of
achievement goal orientations in physical activity: A systematic review of
research. European Journal of Sport Science, 3, 5.
Boaz, A., Ashby, D. and Young, K. (2002). Systematic reviews: what have they got to
offer evidence based policy and practice. ESRC UK Centre for evidence based
policy and practice: working paper 2.
Chin, Y. (2005). A Systematic Review of the Literature on Women’s Roles in the
Management of Olympic Sport in China. Forthcoming paper to the 9th
Interdisciplinary Congress on Women, Seoul, South Korea, June.
Dabinett, G., Lawless, P., Rhodes, J. and Tyler, P. (2001). A review of the evidence
base for regeneration policy and practice. London: Department of the
Environment, Transport and the Regions.
Davies, H.T.O., Nutley, S.M. and Smith, P.C. (1999). The rise and rise of evidence in
health care. Public Money and Management, 18, 1, 9-16.
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
46
Davies, H.T.O., Nutley, S.M. and Smith, P.C. (2000). Editorial: What works? The role
of evidence in public sector policy and practice. Public Money and
Management, 19, 1, 3-5
Evans, D. and Pearson, A. (2001). Systematic reviews: gatekeepers of nursing
knowledge. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 10, 5, 593-599.
Hausenblas, H. A., & Symons Downs, D. (2002). Exercise dependence: A systematic
review. Psychology of Sport & Exercise, 3, 89-123.
Henley Centre (The). (2003). Strategic framework for community sport in England –
Meeting the challenge of Game Plan: emerging insights on the future of
participation in sport in England. London: Sport England.
Klassen, T.P., Jahad, A.R. and Moher, D. (1998). Guides for reading and interpreting
systematic reviews. Archives of Paediatric Adolescent Medicine, 152, 700-704.
Laycock, G. (2000). From central research to local practice: identifying and addressing
repeat victimization. Public Money and Management, 19, 1, 17-22
MacDonald, G. (1999). Evidence-based social care: wheels off the runway?. Public
Money and Management, 19, 1, 25-32.
Maclennan, D. and More, A. (1999). Evidence, what evidence? The foundations for
housing policy. Public Money and Management, 19, 1, 17-24.
Mays, N. & Pope, C. (2000). Qualitative Research in Health Care: Assessing Quality in
Qualitative Research. British Medical Journal, 320(7226), 50-52.
Moore, N. (2004) ‘Clubs are at the heart of everything we do’. Sport England
Governing Bodies WSP – 1SP Workshop.
Moyer, C.A., Maule, C.O. & Cameron, R. (2003). Better solutions for complex
problems: description of a model to support better practices in health.
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
47
Available at: http://www.ctcri.ca/files/BETTER%20SOLUTIONS %2012_02.
pdf. Accessed 4th May 2005.
Murphy, E., Dingwall, R., Greatbach, P. & Watson, P. (1998). Qualitative Research
Methods in Health Technology Assessment: A Review of the Literature. Health
Technology Assessment, 2, 16, 1-209.
Noblit, George W. and Hare, R. Dwight (1988). Meta-ethnography: synthesising
qualitative studies. London: Sage.
Rowe, N., Adams, R. and Beasley, N. (2004). Driving Up Participation in Sport: The
social context, the trends,, the prospects and the challenges. In Rowe, N. (ed)
Driving Up Participation: The Challenge for Sport. London: Sport England.
Sherwood, G. (1997). Meta-synthesis: Merging Qualitative Studies to Develop Nursing
Knowledge. International Journal for Human Caring, 3, 1, 37-42.
Solesbury, William (2002) The ascendancy of evidence. Planning Theory and Practice,
3, 1, 90-96.
Sport England. (2003) Sport Volunteering in England. London: Sport England.
Tranfield, David and Denyer, David (2002). Towards a methodology for developing
evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review.
Report to the ESRC (grant no. IMRC19). Cranfield Business School, UK.
Walsh, D. & Downe, S. (2005). Meta-synthesis Method for Qualitative Research: A
Literature Review. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 50, 2, 204-211.
Weed, M.E. (2004). Sports Tourism Research 2000-2003: A Systematic Review of
Knowledge and a Meta-Evaluation of Method. Paper to the 12th European
Association of Sport Management Congress, Ghent, Belgium, September.
Weed, M.E. (2005). Research Synthesis in Sport Management: Dealing with ‘Chaos in
the Brickyard’. European Sport Management Quarterly, 5, 1.
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
48
7) Articles Included in the Systematic Review
Anheier, H., & Kendall, J. (2002). Interpersonal trust and voluntary associations:
Examining three approaches. The British Journal of Sociology, 53, 3, 343-362.
Arai, S. M (1999). Privatisation and the impact on voluntary associations: tensions
between service provision and citizenship. Journal of Leisurability, 26, 4, 10–
18.
Arai, S. M. (2000). Typology of volunteers for a changing sociopolitical context: The
impact on social capital, citizenship and civil society. Loisir et Societe/Society
and Leisure, 2, 2, 327-352.
Arai, S., Arai, S., & Pedlar, A. (2003). Moving beyond individualism in leisure theory:
a critical analysis of concepts of community and social engagement. Leisure
Studies, 22, 3, 185-202.
Auld, C. (1994).Changes in professional and volunteer administrator relationships:
implications for managers in the leisure industry. Australian Journal of Leisure
and Recreation, 4, 2, 14–22.
Boeck, T., & Fleming, J. (2002). Infusing Social Capital into the Voluntary Sector.
Paper presented at the 8th Annual Conference on Researching the Voluntary
Sector, Nottingham.
Caldwell, L.L. and Anderbeck, K.L (1994). Motives for initiating and continuing
membership in a recreation-related voluntary association. Leisure Sciences, 16,
33-44.
Coleman, R. (2002). Characteristics of volunteering in UK sport: Lessons from cricket.
Managing Leisure, 7, 220-238.
Commonwealth of Australia. (2001). Backing Australia’s Sporting Ability: A More
Active Australia. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
49
Connolly, K. (2002). Do women's leadership approaches support the development of
social capital: relationship building in a voluntary neighbourhood initiative?
Leisure/Loisir: Journal of the Canadian Association for Leisure Studies/Revue
de l'Association canadienne d'etudes en loisir, 27, 3/4, 239-263.
Curtis, J.E., Baer, D.E. and Grabb, E.G. (2001). Nations of Joiners: Explaining
Voluntary Association membership in Democratic Societies. American
Sociological Review, 66, 6, 783–805.
Cuskelly, G. (2003). Volunteer Retention in Community Sport Organisations. Sport
Management Review, 4,2, 59–76.
Cuskelly, G. (1995). Organisational Commitment: The Retention of Volunteers in
Sport. Second ANZALs Conference, Canterbury, 361-366.
Cuskelly, G. (1995). The influence of committee functioning on the organisational
commitment of volunteer administrators in sport. Journal of Sport Behaviour,
18, 4, 254-269.
Cuskelly, G.; McIntyre, N, and Boag, A. (1998). A longitudinal study of the
development of organisational commitment amongst volunteer sport
administrators. Journal of Sport Management, 12, 181-202.
Cuskelly, G.; McIntyre, N, and Boag, A. (1999). Differences in organisational
commitment between paid and volunteers administrators in sport. European
Journal for Sport Management, Special issue, 39-61.
Deckers, P. and Gratton, C. (1995). Participation in sport and membership of traditional
sports clubs: A case study of gymnastics in The Netherlands (with British
comparisons). Leisure Studies, April, 117–131.
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
50
De Knop, P., Theebom, M., De Martelaer, K., Van Puymbroeck, L., Wittock, H. and
Wylleman, P. (1994). Youth sports in the club in crisis? World Leisure and
Recreation, 36, 1, 12-15.
De Knop, P., Van Meerbeek, R., Vanreusel, B., Laporte, W., Theebom, M., Wittock, H.
and De Martelaer, K. (1999). Sports clubs in crisis? European Journal of Sport
management, Special issue, 104-112.
Doherty, A. and Carron, A. (2003). Cohesion in Volunteer Sport Executive
Committees. Journal of Sport Management, 17, 116-141.
Elliot, H. (2004). Athletics Review: Re-creating a Culture for Athletics in Australia.
Canberra: Australian Sports Commission/Athletics Australia.
Enroljas, B. (2002a). The commercialisation voluntary sport organisations in Norway.
Non-profit and voluntary sector quarterly, 31, 13, 352–376.
Enroljas, B. (2002b). Does commercialisation of voluntary sport organisations crowd
out voluntary work? Annuls of public and cooperative economics 73, 3, 375–
398.
Fabrizio Pelak, C. (2002). Women's collective identity formation in sports: a case study
from women's ice hockey. Gender &Society, 16, 1, 93-114.
Glanville, J. (2004). Voluntary associations and social network structure: why
organisational location and type are important. Sociological Forum, 19, 3, 465–
491.
Halfpenny, P. and Reid, M. (2002). Research on the voluntary sector: an overview.
Policy and Politics, 30, 4, 533–550.
Harvey, N. (1997). Are Canadian clubs ready for an overhaul? SwimNews, 10-14.
Horch, H. D. (1994). Resource composition and oligarchization: evidence from
German sport clubs. European Journal for Sport Management, 1, 2, 52–67.
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
51
Horch, H. D. (1996). Self-destroying processes of sport clubs in Germany. European
Journal for Sport Management, 3, 1, 21-37.
Hoover, D. (1996). The Sources of Social Capital Reconsidered: Voluntary
Associations, Advocacy and the State. Society paper presented at the
Communitarianism and Civil Society, Mountberry, GA.
Hoye, R. (2003). Who’s leading, who’s following? Leader-membership exchange
theory and voluntary sport boards. Annuls of Leisure Research, 6, 2, 103-113.
Hoye, R. and Cuskelly, G (2003). Board- executive relationships within voluntary sport
organisations. Sport Management Review, 6, 53–74.
Hoye, R. and Inglis, S. (2003). Governance of Non-profit leisure organisations. Society
and Leisure, 26, 2, 369-387.
Hustinx, L. and Lammertyn, F. (2003). Collective and reflexive styles of volunteering:
A sociological modernization perspective. Voluntas: International Journal of
Voluntary and Non-profit Organisations, 14, 2, 167-187.
Inglis, S. (1997). Shared leadership in the governance of amateur sport: perceptions of
executive directors and volunteer board members. Avante, 3, 1 14–33.
LIRC. (2003). Sports Volunteering in England in 2002, Sport England, London.
Li, Y., Savage, M., & Pickles, A. (2003). Social capital and social exclusion in England
and Wales (1972-1999). British Journal of Sociology, 54, 4, 497-526.
McDonald, C., & Mutch, A. (2000). The future of volunteering as institutionalised
practice. In J. Warburton (Ed.), Volunteers and Volunteering. (pp. 125-139).
Leichardt, NSW: The Federation Press.
Merrill, K. (1996). Redesigning a club structure for the 90’s. Conference proceedings,
10th Outdoor Recreation and Educations Conference, Salt Lake City.
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
52
Nichols, G. and King L. (2000). The changing motivations and frustrations facing
volunteers in youth programs: A study of the Guide Association of the United
Kingdom. Journal of Applied Recreation Research, 23, 3, 243-262.
Nichols, G.; Shibli, S. and Taylor, P. (1998). Local authority support to volunteers in
sport clubs. Managing Leisure: An International Journal, 3, 119– 27.
Nichols, G.; Taylor, P.; James, M.; King, L.; Holmes, K. and Garret, R. (2003).
Pressures on sports volunteers arising from partnerships with the central
government. Society and Leisure, 26, 3, 419–430.
Nichols, G.; Taylor, P.; James, M.; King, L.; Holmes, K.; Garret, R.; Gratton, C and
Kokolakadikis, T. (2004). Voluntary activity in UK sport. Voluntary Action 6,
2, 21 - 54.
Nunn, M. (2000). Building the bridge from episodic volunteerism to social capital.
Fletcher Forum of World Affairs, 24, 2, 115-127.
Onyx, J., Leonard, R., & Hayward-Brown, H. (2003). The special position of
volunteers in the formation of social capita., Voluntary Action, 6, 1, 59-74.
Productivity Commission. (2003). Social Capital: Reviewing the Concept and its
Policy Implications. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.
Riiskjaer, S. (1990). Economic behaviour and cultural perspectives in voluntary sport.
Sports Science Review, 13, Jan, 4-51.
Roe, B. (2001). The State of Domestic Athletics Competition in Australia. Melbourne:
Athletics Australia.
Seippel, O. (2002). Volunteers and professionals in Norwegian sport organisations.
Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Non-Profit Organisations, 13,
3, 253-270.
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
53
Seippel. O. (2004). The world according to voluntary sport organisations. International
Review for the Sociology of Sport, 39, 2, 223-232.
Shibli, S., Taylor, P., Nichols, G., Gratton, C., and Kokolakadikis, T. (1999). The
characteristics of volunteers in UK sports clubs. European Journal for Sports
Management, Special Issue, 10-27.
Sixsmith, J., & Boneham, M. (2003). Volunteering and the concept of social capital.
Voluntary Action, 5, 3, 47-60.
SportScotland. (2001). Sports Clubs in Scotland. Research Report 75 SportScotland.
Stewart, B., Nicholson, M., Smith, A. and Westerbeek, H. (2004). Australian Sport:
Better By Design? The Evolution of Australian Sport Policy. London:
Routledge.
Tihanyi, J. (2001a, May-June). Discontent on deck. SwimNews, 6-9.
Tihanyi, J. (2001b, April). A plea for a critical review. SwimNews, 29.
The State of Victoria. (2002). User-friendly sport. Handbook, Australia, State of
Victoria.
Turner, D., & Martin, S. (2004). Managerialism meets community development:
Contracting for social inclusion? Policy & Politics, 32, 1, 21.
Verhoeven, M.; Laporte, W.; de Knop, P.; Taks, M. Bollaert, L.; van Blunder, D. and
Duysters, A. (1997). Voluntary work in the changing environment of sport;
empirical study about the development of professional expertise in sports
federations and sports clubs. Conference proceedings, EASM Congress,
Glasgow.
Verhoeven, M., Laporte, W., De Knop, P., Bollaert, L., Taks, M. and Vincke, J. (1999).
In search of macro-, meso-, and micro sociological antecedents of conflict in
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
54
voluntary sports federations and clubs with the Flemish situation as case study.
European Journal for Sport Management, Special Issue: 62-77.
Warburton, J. and Mutch, A. (2000). Volunteer Resources, Will People Continue to
Volunteer in the Next Century. In Warburton, J. and Oppenheimer, (2000).
Volunteers and Volunteering, Annandale; Federation Press.
Warburton, J. and Smith, J. (2003). Out of the generosity of your heart: Are we creating
active citizens through compulsory volunteer programmes for young peoples in
Australia? Social Policy and Administration, 37, 7, 772-786.
Warde, A., Tampubolon, G., Longhurst, B., Ray, K., Savage, M., & Tomlinson, M.
(2003). Trends in Social Capital: Membership of Associations in Great Britain,
1991-98. British Journal of Political Science, 33, 3, 515.
Wollebaek, D., & Selle, P. (2002). Does participation in voluntary associations
contribute to social capital? The impact of intensity, scope, and type. Nonprofit
and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 31, 1, 32-61.
Williams , C.C. (2003). Developing voluntary activity: Some policy issues arising from
the 2001 Home Office Citizenship Survey. Social Policy and Society, 2, 4, 285294.
Wilson, J. and Musick, M. (1997). Who cares? Towards an integrated theory of
volunteer work. American Sociological Review, 62, 5 694-713
© Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
55