Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics Meeting Coyte G. Cooper & Erianne A. Weight

1. Examining Administrator and Coach Perceptions of Value Systems in NCAA Division I Athletic Departments Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics Meeting Coyte G. Cooper & Erianne A. Weight

2. Summary of Presentation • Statement of the Problem • Purpose of Study • Significance of Core Values • Data Collection • Results • Implications • Conclusions/Questions

3. Statement of Problem • Presence of “arms race” in intercollegiate athletics • Conference realignment, multi-billion dollar television deals, and star amateur athletes dominate headlines (Knight Commission, 2010; Sack, 2009) • Escalating commercialism as product of administrative reward system • Dualism in value system in Division I athletics • Integrating into higher education – paramount SA experience • “Arms race” and lavish spending for national exposure and perceived financial rewards

4. Purpose of Study Influence of Environment Purpose: To explore the priority level of core values from two viewpoints to gain an understanding of the value systems that exist within NCAA Division I athletic departments: • Administrators’ perceptions of critical values in department • Coaches’ perceptions of critical values in department Importance of Values

5. Significance of Core Values • Provide meaningful direction for organization (Abreu et al., 2009; Collin & Porras, 2000) • Shared guiding principles that are “essential and enduring elements” of effective organization (Collin & Porras, 1996) • Congruency is key to realize critical benefits of enhanced efficiency and motivated employees • Athletic department specific: Athletic organism morphed into divided system (Cooper & Weight, 2011)

6. Data Collection • Creation of online “Core Values” survey • Assess key values portrayed in mission statements • Broke values into two specific categories • Developed definitions for each value on instrument • Invested in validity review process • Panel of experts (Four senior AD’s, two profs, and one statistician) • Review definitions and make suggestions for final scale • Distribution to D-I athletic departments • Targeted head AD’s and coaches (other administrators included)

7. Results (Organizational Values - Administrator)

8. Results (Aspirational Values - Administrator)

9. Variations in Organizational Values

10. Variations in Aspirational Values

11. Contradictions Between Values & Practice? • Administrator Narratives (n=178): • No contradictions exist (55%) • Tensions exist, but values supersede (10%) • Culture is in a process of transformation (6%) • Systemic contradictions exist (29%) • Financial gains often prioritized over values (27%) • Winning often prioritized over values by coaches and some administrators (16%)

12. Contradictions Between Values & Practice? • Coaches (n=1005): • No contradictions exist (54%) • Tensions exist, but values supersede (4%) • Systemic contradictions exist (41%) • Overall administrator hypocrisy (29%) • Variation in standards between sports (22%) • Lack of financial support to facilitate value-achievement (12%) • Winning prioritized over values (8%) • Little care for coaches & staff (6%) • Other (20%) • No values – no contradictions (1%)

13. Conclusions • In an era where intercollegiate athletics morals are continually being contested it is critical to understand the values driving decisions. • Evidence of sound ideals and practices • Evidence of inconsistency between stated values and entrenched practices • At minimum: poor leadership and lack of value culturization • At extreme: clear administrator hypocrisy and outright patronization of the public and internal stakeholders.

14. Conclusions • It is imperative for internal and external stakeholders of intercollegiate athletics to demand values-driven leadership based on education-centered ethos. • This model exists within a majority of respondent schools. • The benefits of value-culturalization (e.g. increased morale, productivity, and decision making) were evident in these schools.

15. The tremendous opportunity for good within intercollegiate athletics… “College athletics have a bad reputation right now…and the media show[s] all the negatives. There is not a contradiction within my athletic department between values and practice. My administrators and leaders have the best interest of the student-athletes in mind and are doing their best to make value-driven decisions that are morally right” -FBS-AQ Female Assistant Coach

16. Contact Information • Coyte Cooper • Email: cgcooper@email.unc.edu • Phone: 360.593.1351 • Twitter handle: @coytecooper • Erianne Weight • Email: eweight@email.unc.edu • Phone: 919.448.4870 • Twitter handle: @erianneweight